Beryl Ferguson’s research while affiliated with Western University and other places

The objective of this study was to assess the cost-utility of renal transplantation compared with dialysis. To accomplish this, a prospective cohort of pre-transplant patients were followed for up to two years after renal transplantation at three University-based Canadian hospitals. A total of 168 patients were followed for an average of 19.5 months after transplantation. Health-related quality of life was assessed using a hemodialysis questionnaire, a transplant questionnaire, the Sickness Impact Profile, and the Time Trade-Off Technique. Fully allocated costs were determined by prospectively recording resource use in all patients. A societal perspective was taken. By six months after transplantation, the mean health-related quality of life scores of almost all measures had improved compared to pre-transplantation, and they stayed improved throughout the two years of follow up. The mean time trade-off score was 0.57 pre-transplant and 0.70 two years after transplantation. The proportion of individuals employed increased from 30% before transplantation to 45% two years after transplantation. Employment prior to transplantation [relative risk (RR) = 23], graft function (RR 10) and age (RR 1.6 for every decrease in age by one decade), independently predicted employment status after transplantation. The cost of pre-transplant care ($66,782 Can 1994) and the cost of the first year after transplantation ($66,290) were similar. Transplantation was considerably less expensive during the second year after transplantation ($27,875). Over the two years, transplantation was both more effective and less costly than dialysis. This was true for all subgroups of patients examined, including patients older than 60 and diabetics. We conclude that renal transplantation was more effective and less costly than dialysis in all subgroups of patients examined.

A disease-specific questionnaire to assess the quality of life of renal transplant recipients was developed. A list of items of potential relevance to these patients was created and 50 transplant recipients rated the importance of each item. A combination of factor analysis and clinical judgment was then used to create the final questionnaire which consists of 25 questions in 5 dimensions (physical symptoms, fatigue, uncertainty/fear, appearance and emotions). The physical symptoms dimension is patient specific. All questions are scored on a 7-point Likert scale. The reproducibility of the questionnaire when it was administered to stable transplant recipients was high (intraclass correlation coefficients between 0.82 and 0.91 for the 5 dimensions). The scores of all dimensions except appearance improved 6 months after transplantation, when compared to pretransplantation scores. Patients who had a well-functioning graft (creatinine < 250 mmol/l) had higher scores than those with poorly functioning grafts. This questionnaire is easy to administer and is valid, reproducible in stable patients and responsive to change.