S

Susan H. Finkelstein

Yale New Haven Hospital

Publishes on Dialysis and Renal Disease Management, Health Systems, Economic Evaluations, Quality of Life, Central Venous Catheters and Hemodialysis. 57 papers and 2.1k citations.

57Publications
2.1kTotal Citations

Is this you? Claim your profile.

Add your photo, update your bio, and get notified when your ranking changes.

Top publicationsby citations

Hemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis
Erika M Juergensen, Diane Wuerth, Susan H. Finkelstein et al.|Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology|2006
Cited by 205

This study was undertaken to examine patient satisfaction with peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) therapies, focusing attention on the positive and negative impact of the therapies on patients' lives. Patients were recruited from a free-standing PD unit and two free-standing HD units. A total of 94% (n = 62) of eligible PD and 84% (n = 84) of eligible HD patients participated. HD patients were significantly older and had higher Charlson Comorbidity Index scores than the PD patients, but there were no differences in duration of dialysis treatment, prevalence of diabetes, educational backgrounds, or home situations. Patients were asked to rate their overall satisfaction with and the overall impact of their dialysis therapy on their lives, using a 1 to 10 Likert scale. In addition, patients were asked to rate the impact of their therapy on 15 domains that had been cited previously as being important for patients' quality of life. The mean satisfaction score for PD patients (8.02 +/- 1.41) was higher than for HD patients (7.4 +/- 1.4; P = 0.15). PD patients indicated that there was less impact of the dialysis treatment on their lives globally (7.25 +/- 2.12 versus 6.19 +/- 2.83; P = 0.019). In addition, PD patients noted less impact of the therapy in 14 of the 15 domains examined. With the use of a proportional odds model analysis, the only significant predictor of overall satisfaction and impact of therapy was dialysis modality (P = 0.037 and P = 0.021, respectively). Patients also were asked to comment freely on the positive and negative effects of the dialysis treatments on their lives, and a taxonomy of patient perceptions and concerns was developed. This study suggests that PD patients in general are more satisfied with their overall care and believe that their treatment has less impact on their lives than HD patients.

Patients’ Descriptions of Specific Factors Leading to Modality Selection of Chronic Peritoneal Dialysis Or Hemodialysis
Diane Wuerth, Susan H. Finkelstein, Olena Schwetz et al.|Peritoneal Dialysis International|2002
Cited by 131

OBJECTIVES: There has been increasing interest in understanding how patients with chronic renal failure choose between chronic peritoneal dialysis (CPD) and hemodialysis (HD) for renal replacement therapy. The purpose of the present study was to examine the influences and specific factors that patients identify as significant in choosing a specific dialysis modality for treatment of their end-stage renal disease (ESRD). PATIENTS AND DESIGN: 40 patients (20 CPD, 20 HD) who had started dialysis within the preceding 6 months were randomly selected to participate in the study. A structured interview was conducted with the patients, discussing and exploring what factors patients thought were important in helping them decide their treatment modality. The format of the interview was open-ended. Based on patients' comments, a taxonomy of the specific factors that influenced the patients' decisions was developed. SETTING: The study was conducted in a freestanding CPD unit and two freestanding HD units. RESULTS: All 20 CPD patients reported choosing their treatment modality; only 8 of the 20 HD patients reported having a choice of treatment modality. 18 of the 22 patients who participated in predialysis educational programs opted for CPD. 83% of the patients reported that their physician was important in influencing their treatment choice; however, the CPD patients relied more on written material and the opinions of their spouse/significant other or other family members in making their decisions. Issues of autonomy and control were important for 95% of patients choosing CPD. Both CPD and HD patients cited a variety of treatment-specific factors. The three most frequently cited reasons for choosing CPD were (1) flexibility of schedule (19 patients), (2) convenience of performing CPD in their own home (19 patients), and (3) the option of doing dialysis at night while sleeping (8 patients). The 8 HD patients who selected their treatment modality cited the desirability of having a planned schedule (7 patients) and letting nurses or other take care of them (5 patients). CONCLUSIONS: The present study explored factors perceived by patients as being important in determining their choice of renal replacement therapy. A taxonomy of patient influences and concerns has been developed to provide caregivers with a framework to structure their educational strategies and assist patients with progressive renal failure in making an informed choice of therapeutic modality for their ESRD treatment.