Background: Technique failure is an important outcome measure in research and quality improvement in peritoneal dialysis (PD) programs, but there is a lack of consistency in how it is reported.
Methods: We used data collected about incident dialysis patients from 10 Canadian dialysis programs between 1 January 2004 and 31 December 2018. We identified four main steps that are required when calculating the risk of technique failure. We changed one variable at a time, and then all steps, simultaneously, to determine the impact on the observed risk of technique failure at 24 months.
Results: A total of 1448 patients received PD. Selecting different cohorts of PD patients changed the observed risk of technique failure at 24 months by 2%. More than one-third of patients who switched to hemodialysis returned to PD-90% returned within 180 days. The use of different time windows of observation for a return to PD resulted in risks of technique failure that differed by 16%. The way in which exit events were handled during the time window impacted the risk of technique failure by 4% and choice of statistical method changed results by 4%. Overall, the observed risk of technique failure at 24 months differed by 20%, simply by applying different approaches to the same data set.
Conclusions: The approach to reporting technique failure has an important impact on the observed results. We present a robust and transparent methodology to track technique failure over time and to compare performance between programs.
Keywords: Peritoneal dialysis; quality improvement; statistical methods; technique failure.