[Skip to Content]
[Skip to Content Landing]
Article
April 1989

A Comparison of Employment Rates of Patients Treated With Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis vs In-Center Hemodialysis (Michigan End-Stage Renal Disease Study)

Author Affiliations

From the Departments of Epidemiology (Drs Julius and Hawthorne and Mss Kneisley and Carpentier-Alting), Biostatistics (Dr Wolfe), School of Public Health, and Department of Internal Medicine (Dr Port), School of Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.

Arch Intern Med. 1989;149(4):839-842. doi:10.1001/archinte.1989.00390040061012
Abstract

• This study examines factors associated with employment status in a stratified subsample of the Michigan End-Stage Renal Disease Study population. To reduce the variation in employment potential, the subsample consisted of nondiabetic patients aged 20 to 64 years. The patients were stratified on the basis of their treatment histories as follows: (1) treated by in-center hemodialysis only; (2) primarily treated by continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis; and (3) failed continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis, substituted by another form of dialysis. A significantly higher percentage of the patients undergoing stable continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis were in the labor force than were those undergoing in-center hemodialysis (27.4% vs 9.6%). Using logistic regression, even when adjusted for sex, race, age, education, marital status, primary diagnosis, and duration of end-stage renal disease, the stable continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis group was significantly more likely to be employed than the group undergoing either in-center hemodialysis only or the group that failed continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis.

(Arch Intern Med. 1989;149:839-842)

×