Analysis and interpretation of cost data in dialysis: review of Western European literature

Do remote dialysis services really cost more? An economic analysis of hospital and dialysis modality costs associated with dialysis services in urban, rural and remote settings

Background

Rates of end-stage kidney disease in Australia are highest in the Northern Territory (NT), with the burden of disease heaviest in remote areas. However, the high cost of delivering dialysis services in remote areas has resulted in centralisation, requiring many people to relocate for treatment. Patients argue that treatment closer to home improves health outcomes and reduces downstream healthcare use. Existing dialysis cost studies have not compared total health care costs associated with treatment in different locations.

Objective

To estimate and compare, from a payer perspective, the observed health service costs (all cause hospital admissions, emergency department presentations and maintenance dialysis) associated with different dialysis models in urban, rural and remote locations.

Methods

Using cost weights attributed to diagnostic codes in the NT Department of Health’s hospital admission data set (2008–2014), we calculated the mean (SD) total annual health service costs by dialysis model for 995 dialysis patients. Generalized linear modeling with bootstrapping tested the marginal cost differences between different explanatory variables to estimate ‘best casemix’/‘worst casemix’ cost scenarios.

Results

The mean annual patient hospital expenditure was highest for urban models at $97 928 (SD $21 261) and $43 440 (SD $5 048) and lowest for remote at $19 584 (SD $4 394). When combined with the observed maintenance dialysis costs, expenditure was the highest for urban models at $148 510 (SD $19 774). The incremental cost increase of dialysing in an urban area, compared with a rural area, for a relocated person from a remote area, was $5 648 more and increased further for those from remote and very remote areas to $10 785 and $15 118 respectively.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that dialysis treatment in urban areas for relocated people has health and cost implications that maybe greater than the cost of remote service delivery. The study emphasises the importance of considering all health service costs and cost consequences of service delivery models.

Key points for decision makers

Relocation for dialysis treatment has serious health and economic consequences. Relocated people have low dialysis attendance and high hospital costs in urban areas. While remote dialysis service models are more expensive than urban models, the comparative cost differences are significantly reduced when all health service costs are included. The delivery of equitable and accessible dialysis service models requires a holistic approach that incorporates the needs of the patient; hence dialysis cost studies must consider the full range of cost impacts beyond the dialysis treatments alone.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-06612-z.

Most people requiring ongoing treatment for end-stage kidney disease in the Northern Territory (NT) identify as Aboriginal with the majority residing in areas classified as remote or very remote. Unlike other jurisdictions in Australia, haemodialysis in a satellite unit is the most common form of treatment. However, there is a geographic mismatch between demand and service provision, with services centralised in urban areas. Patients and communities have long advocated for services at or closer to home, maintaining that the consequences of relocation and dislocation have far reaching health, psychosocial and economic ramifications. We analysed retrospective hospital data for 995 maintenance dialysis patients, stratified by the model of care they received in urban, rural and remote locations. Using cost weights attributed to diagnosis codes, we costed hospital admissions, emergency department presentations and maintenance dialysis attendances, to provide a mean total health service cost/patient/year for each model of care. We found that urban services were associated with low observed maintenance dialysis and high hospital costs, but the inverse was true for remote and very remote models. Remote models had high maintenance dialysis costs (due to expense of remote service delivery and good dialysis attendance) but low hospital usage and costs. When adjusted for other variables such as age, dialysis vintage and comorbidities, lower total hospital costs were associated with rural and remote service provision. In an environment of escalating demand and constrained budgets, this study underlines the need for policy decisions to consider the full cost consequences of different dialysis service models.

Emergent initiation of dialysis is related to an increase in both mortality and medical costs

The number of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) has been increasing, with dialysis treatment being a serious economic problem. To date, no report in Japan considered medical costs spent at the initiation of dialysis treatment, although some reports in other countries described high medical costs in the first year. This study focused on patient status at the time of initiation of dialysis and examined how it affects prognosis and the medical costs. As a result, all patients dying within 4 months experienced emergent dialysis initiation. Emergent dialysis initiation and high medical costs were risk factors for death within 2 years. High C-reactive protein levels and emergent dialysis initiation were associated with increasing medical costs. Acute kidney injury (AKI) contributed most to emergent dialysis initiation followed by stroke, diabetes, heart failure, and short-term care by nephrologists. Therefore, emergent dialysis initiation was a contributing factor to both death and increasing medical costs. To avoid the requirement for emergent dialysis initiation, patients with ESRD should be referred to nephrologists earlier. Furthermore, ESRD patients with clinical histories of AKI, stroke, diabetes, or heart failure should be observed carefully and provided pre-planned initiation of dialysis.

Cost of Hemodialysis Treatment and Associated Factors Among End-Stage Renal Disease Patients at the Tertiary Hospitals of Addis Ababa City and Amhara Region, Ethiopia

Purpose

Hemodialysis is a renal replacement therapy for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients who consume substantial healthcare resources, which increases the economic burden. Plenty of factors affects the cost of hemodialysis treatment, particularly in resource-limited settings. Moreover, the demand for hemodialysis may decrease as the cost increases, but there is limited evidence in Ethiopia. Thus, this study aimed to estimate the cost of hemodialysis treatment among ESRD patients in the tertiary hospitals of Addis Ababa City and Amhara region, Ethiopia.

Patients and Methods

An institutional-based cross-sectional study was conducted among 172 ESRD patients undergoing hemodialysis treatment. A structured questionnaire and patients’ medical chart were used to estimate the costs, and the human capital approach was applied to calculate the indirect costs. A generalized linear model (GLM) was fitted after the modified park test to identify the associated factors. In the final GLM, a p-value of <0.05 and a 95% CI were used to declare the significant variables.

Results

The mean annual cost of hemodialysis treatment was 121,089.27ETB ($4466.59) ± 33,244.99 ($1226.29). The direct and indirect costs covered 77.0% and 23.0% of the total costs, respectively. Age (ex(b): 1.01, p-value <0.001), highest wealth status (ex(b): 1.09, p-value: 0.008), eight (ex(b): 1.27, p-value <0.001) and 12 visits/month (ex(b): 1.34, p-value <0.001), anemia (ex(b): 1.13, p-value <0.001), and comorbidity (ex(b): 1.09, p-value: 0.039) were the factors associated with the costs of hemodialysis treatment.

Conclusion

The annual cost of hemodialysis treatment among ESRD patients was high compared to the national per capita health expenditure, and two-thirds covered by the direct medical costs. Old age, high wealth status, more visits, anemia, and comorbidity were factors associated with the costs of hemodialysis. Therefore, the healthcare system must make a great effort for cost reduction and reduce the patients with kidney disease before they reach end-stages.

The Cost Barrier to Peritoneal Dialysis in the Developing World—An Asian Perspective

Countries in Asia vary significantly in culture and socioeconomic status. Dialysis costs and reimbursement structures are significant factors in decisions about the rates and modalities of renal replacement therapy. From our survey of Asian nephrologists conducted in 2001, a number of observations can be made.

In many developing countries, the annual cost of continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) is greater than the per-capita gross national income (GNI). The median cost of a 2-L bag of peritoneal dialysis (PD) fluid is around US$5. The absolute cost of PD fluid among countries with significant differences in per-capita GNI actually varies very little. Thus, most renal failure patients can be expected to have problems accessing PD therapy in developing countries in Asia.

In countries with unequal reimbursement policies for PD versus hemodialysis, a lack of incentive to prescribe PD also exists. Automated PD is nearly non existent in many developing countries in Asia.

Some possible ways to reduce the cost barriers to PD in those countries include

• individual governments providing more public funding for treating dialysis patients;

• dialysate-producing companies reducing the cost of their products;

• physicians using appropriately smaller exchange volumes (3 x 2 L) in some Asian patients with smaller body sizes and with residual renal function; and

• reducing the complication rate for PD (for example, peritonitis) thereby reducing the costs required for treatment and hospitalization.

A comprehensive approach to assess the costs of renal replacement therapy for end-stage renal disease in France: the importance of age, diabetes status, and clinical events

OBJECTIVES

In the current pressured economic context, and to continue to treat the growing number of patients with high-quality standards, the first step is to have a better understanding of the costs related to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) treatment according to various renal replacement therapy, age, diabetes status, and clinical events.

METHODS

In order to estimate the direct costs of all adult ESRD patients, according to (RRT) modality, patient condition, and clinical events, data from the French national health insurance funds were used.

RESULTS

The mean monthly costs for the 47,862 stable prevalent patients (73 % of the population) varied substantially according to treatment modality (from 7300€ for in-center hemodialysis to 1100€ for a functioning renal graft) and to clinical event (8300€ for the first month of dialysis, 11,000€ for the last month before death, 22,800€ for the first month after renal transplantation). Mean monthly costs varied according to diabetic status and to age to a lesser extent.

CONCLUSIONS

These results demonstrate, for the first time in France and in Europe, the importance of a dynamic view of renal care and the bias likely when comparing treatments in cross-sectional studies.

Economic costs of automated and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis in Taiwan: a combined survey and retrospective cohort analysis

OBJECTIVES

Taiwan succeeded in raising the proportion of peritoneal dialysis (PD) usage after the National Health Insurance (NHI) payment scheme introduced financial incentives in 2005. This study aims to compare the economic costs between automated PD (APD) and continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD) modalities from a societal perspective.

DESIGN AND SETTING

A retrospective cohort of patients receiving PD from the NHI Research Database was identified during 2004-2011. The 1:1 propensity score matched 1749 APD patients and 1749 CAPD patients who were analysed on their NHI-financed medical costs and utilisation. A multicentre study by face-to-face interviews on 117 APD and 129 CAPD patients from five hospitals located in four regions of Taiwan was further carried out to collect data on their out-of-pocket payments, productivity losses and quality of life with EuroQol-5D-5L.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The NHI-financed medical costs, out-of-pocket payments and productivity losses of APD and CAPD patients.

RESULTS

The total NHI-financed medical costs per patient-year after 5 years of follow-up were significantly higher with APD than CAPD (US$23 005 vs US$19 237; p<0.01). In terms of dialysis-related costs, APD had higher costs resulting from the use of APD machines (US$795) and APD sets (US$2913). Significantly lower productivity losses were found with APD (US$2619) than CAPD (US$6443), but the out-of-pocket payments were not significantly different. The differences in NHI-financed medical costs and productivity losses between APD and CAPD remained robust in the bootstrap analysis. The total economic costs of APD (US$30 401) were similar to those of CAPD (US$29 939), even after bootstrap analysis (APD, US$28 399; CAPD, US$27 960). No discernable differences were found in the results of mortality and quality of life between the APD and CAPD patients.

CONCLUSIONS

APD had higher annual dialysis-related costs and lower annual productivity losses than CAPD, which made the economic costs of APD very close to those of CAPD in Taiwan.

Cost-effectiveness of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis: A national cohort study with 14 years follow-up and matched for comorbidities and propensity score

Although treatment for the dialysis population is resource intensive, a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) by matched pairs is still lacking. After matching for clinical characteristics and propensity scores, we identified 4,285 pairs of incident HD and PD patients from a Taiwanese national cohort during 1998-2010. Survival and healthcare expenditure were calculated by data of 14-year follow-up and subsequently extrapolated to lifetime estimates under the assumption of constant excess hazard. We performed a cross-sectional EQ-5D survey on 179 matched pairs of prevalent HD and PD patients of varying dialysis vintages from 12 dialysis units. The product of survival probability and the mean utility value at each time point (dialysis vintage) were summed up throughout lifetime to obtain the quality-adjusted life expectancy (QALE). The results revealed the estimated life expectancy between HD and PD were nearly equal (19.11 versus 19.08 years). The QALE's were also similar, whereas average lifetime healthcare costs were higher in HD than PD (237,795 versus 204,442 USD) and the cost-effectiveness ratios for PD and HD were 13,681 and 16,643 USD per quality-adjusted life year, respectively. In conclusion, PD is more cost-effective than HD, of which the major determinants were the costs for the dialysis modality and its associated complications.

The cost of dialysis in low and middle-income countries: a systematic review

Background

The cost of dialysis in low and middle-Income countries has not been systematically reviewed. The objective of this article is to systematically review peer-reviewed articles on the cost of dialysis across low and middle-income countries.

Methods

PubMed and Embase databases were searched for the year 1998 to March 2013, and additional studies were added from Google Scholar search. An article was included if two reviewers agreed that it had reported cost of dialysis from low and middle-Income countries.

Results

The annual cost per patient for hemodialysis (HD) ranged from Int$ 3,424 to Int$ 42,785, and peritoneal dialysis (PD) ranged from Int$ 7,974 to Int$ 47,971. Direct medical cost especially drugs and consumables for HD and dialysis solutions and tubing for PD were the main cost drivers.

Conclusion

The number of studies on the economics of dialysis in low and middle-income countries is limited. Few papers indicate that dialysis is an expensive form of treatment for the population of these countries and that the poorer countries have an over-proportional burden to finance dialysis services. Further research is needed to determine the cost of dialysis based on a standard methodology grounded on existing economic guidelines and to address the question whether dialysis should be an element of the essential package of health in resource-poor countries. Used data should be as complete as possible. In case of missing data, proxies can be used. In case of developing countries, expert interviews are often used for estimating missing information.

The role of economies of scale in the cost of dialysis across the world: a macroeconomic perspective

BACKGROUND

The treatment of chronic kidney disease through dialysis is a considerable expense in most health systems. The two chief methods of providing dialysis, haemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) have significant differences in cost composition and factors of production. The aim of this article is to identify and quantify the macroeconomic variables that influence the relative cost of such modalities across different countries.

METHODS

From previously published literature, we extracted the estimates of HD/PD cost ratios in a total of 46 countries. We conducted a multivariate regression analysis using the estimated HD/PD cost ratio in each country, with several country level indicators as explanatory variables. We found a strong statistical effect of the following variables on the HD/PD cost ratio: country's level of development, economies of scale and percentage of private health-care expenditure.

RESULTS

The statistical effects on HD/PD ratio by local manufacturing and relaxed import regulation of PD equipment were calculated and were found to be very significant.

CONCLUSIONS

it is possible for a country to still reap the benefits of economies of scale in provision of PD, even in the absence of a large enough market to make local production of PD equipment feasible in that country.

Comparison of cost-utility between automated peritoneal dialysis and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis

BACKGROUND AND AIMS

The use of automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) is increasing compared to continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD). Surprisingly, little data about health benefits and cost of APD exist, and virtually no information comparing the cost-utility between CAPD and APD is available. We undertook this study to evaluate and compare the health-related quality of life (HRQOL) and cost-utility indexes in patients on CAPD vs.

APD METHODS

This was a prospective cohort of patients initiating dialysis (2008-2009). Two questionnaires were self-administered: European Research Questionnaire Quality of Life (EQ-5D) and Kidney Disease Quality of Life (short form, KDQOL-SF, Rand, Santa Monica, CA). Direct medical costs (DMC) were determined from the health provider perspective including the following medical resource utilization: outpatient clinic/emergency care, dialysis procedures, medications, laboratory tests, hospitalization, and surgery. Cost-utility indexes were calculated dividing total mean cost by indicators of the HRQOL.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-three patients were evaluated: 77 on CAPD and 46 on APD. Results of the EQ-5D and KDQOL-SF questionnaires were significantly better in APD compared to the CAPD group. Main costs in both APD and CAPD were attributed to hospitalization and dialysis procedures followed by medication and surgery. Outpatient clinic visits and laboratory tests were significantly more costly in CAPD than in APD, whereas dialysis procedures were more expensive in the latter. Cost-utility indexes were significantly better in APD compared to CAPD.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant cost-utility advantage of APD vs. CAPD was observed. The annual DMC per-patient were not different between groups but the HRQOL was better in the APD compared to the CAPD group.

Comparison of direct medical costs between automated and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis

OBJECTIVE

We set out to estimate the direct medical costs (DMCs) of peritoneal dialysis (PD) and to compare the DMCs for continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD) and automated PD (APD). In addition, DMCs according to age, sex, and the presence of peritonitis were evaluated.

METHODS

Our retrospective cohort analysis considered patients initiating PD, calculating 2008 costs and, for comparison, updating the results for 2010. The analysis took the perspective of the Mexican Institute of Social Security, including outpatient clinic and emergency room visits, dialysis procedures, medications, laboratory tests, hospitalizations, and surgeries.

RESULTS

No baseline differences were observed for the 41 patients evaluated (22 on CAPD, 19 on APD). Median annual DMCs per patient on PD were US$15 072 in 2008 and US$16 452 in 2010. When analyzing percentage distribution, no differences were found in the DMCs for the modality groups. In both APD and CAPD, the main costs pertained to the dialysis procedure (CAPD 41%, APD 47%) and hospitalizations (CAPD 37%, APD 32%). Dialysis procedures cost significantly more (p = 0.001) in APD (US$7 084) than in CAPD (US$6 071), but total costs (APD US$15 389 vs CAPD US$14 798) and other resources were not different. The presence of peritonitis increased the total costs (US$16 075 vs US$14 705 for patients without peritonitis, p = 0.05), but in the generalized linear model analysis, DMCs were not predicted by age, sex, dialysis modality, or peritonitis. A similar picture was observed for costs extrapolated to 2010, with a 10% - 20% increase for each component--except for laboratory tests, which increased 52%, and dialysis procedures, which decreased 3%, from 2008.

CONCLUSIONS

The annual DMCs per patient on PD in this study were US$15 072 in 2008 and US$16 452 in 2010. Total DMCs for dialysis procedures were higher in APD than in CAPD, but the difference was not statistically significant. In both APD and CAPD, 90% of costs were attributable to the dialysis procedure, hospitalizations, and medications. In a multivariate analysis, no independent variable significantly predicted a higher DMC.

An economic assessment model for in-center, conventional home, and more frequent home hemodialysis

More intensive and/or frequent hemodialysis may provide clinical benefits to patients with end-stage renal disease; however, these dialysis treatments are more convenient to the patients if provided in their homes. Here we created a standardized model, based on a systematic review of available costing literature, to determine the economic viability of providing hemodialysis in the home that arrays costs and common approaches for assessing direct medical and nonmedical costs. Our model was based on data from Australia, Canada, and the United Kingdom. The first year start-up costs for all hemodialysis modalities were higher than in subsequent years with modeled costs for conventional home hemodialysis lower than in-center hemodialysis in subsequent years. Modeled costs for frequent home hemodialysis was higher than both in-center and conventional home hemodialysis in the United Kingdom, but lower than in-center hemodialysis and higher than conventional home hemodialysis in Australia and Canada in subsequent years. The higher costs of frequent compared to conventional home hemodialysis were because of higher consumable usage due to dialysis frequency. Thus, our findings reinforce the conclusions of previous studies showing that home-based conventional and more frequent hemodialysis may provide clinical benefit at reasonable costs.

Cost-effectiveness of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors for the prevention of diabetic nephropathy in The Netherlands--a Markov model

OBJECTIVE

Type 2 diabetes is the main cause of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in Europe and the USA. Angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors have a potential to slow down the progression of renal disease and therefore provide a renal-protective effect. The aim of our study was to assess the most cost-effective time to start an ACE inhibitor (or an angiotensin II receptor blocker [ARB] if coughing as a side effect occurs) in patients with newly diagnosed type 2 diabetes in The Netherlands.

METHODS

A lifetime Markov decision model with simulated 50-year-old patients with newly diagnosed diabetes mellitus was developed using published data on costs and health outcomes and simulating the progression of renal disease. A health insurance perspective was adopted. Three strategies were compared: treating all patients at the time of diagnosing type 2 diabetes, screening for microalbuminuria, and screening for macroalbuminuria.

RESULTS

In the base-case analysis, the treat-all strategy is associated with the lowest costs and highest benefit and therefore dominates screening both for macroalbuminuria and microalbuminuria. A multivariate sensitivity analysis shows that the probability of savings is 70%.

CONCLUSIONS

In The Netherlands for patients with type 2 diabetes prescription of an ACE inhibitor immediately after diagnosis should be considered if they do not have contraindications. An ARB should be considered for those patients developing a dry cough under ACE inhibitor therapy. The potential for cost savings would be even larger if the prevention of cardiovascular events were considered.

Cost analysis of the Spanish renal replacement therapy programme

BACKGROUND

A cost analysis of the Spanish Renal Replacement Therapy (RRT) programme in the year 2010, for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients, was performed from the perspective of the Public Administration.

METHODS

The costs associated with each RRT modality [hemodialysis (HD), peritoneal dialysis (PD) and kidney transplantation (Tx)] were analysed. The Spanish ESRD incidence and prevalence figures in the year 2010 were forecasted in order to enable the calculation of an aggregate cost for each modality. Costs were mainly computed based on a review of the existing literature and of the Official Bulletins of the Spanish Autonomous Communities. Data from Oblikue Consulting eSalud health care costs database and from several Spanish public sources were also employed.

RESULTS

In the year 2010, the forecasted incidence figures for HD, PD and Tx were 5409, 822 and 2317 patients, respectively. The forecasted prevalence figures were 22,582, 2420 and 24,761 patients, respectively. The average annual per-patient costs (incidence and prevalence) were €2651 and €37,968 (HD), €1808 and €25,826 (PD) and €38,313 and €6283 (Tx). Indirect costs amounted to €8929 (HD), €7429 (PD) and €5483 (Tx). The economic impact of the Spanish RRT programme on the Public Administration budget was estimated at ~€1829 million (indirect costs included): €1327 (HD), €109 (PD) and €393 (Tx) million.

CONCLUSIONS

HD accounted for >70% of the aggregate costs of the Spanish RRT programme in 2010. From a costs minimization perspective, it would be preferable if the number of incident and prevalent patients in PD were increased.

Update on Dialysis Economics in the UK

The burgeoning population of patients requiring renal replacement therapy contributes a disproportionate strain on National Health Service resources. Although renal transplantation is the preferred treatment modality for patients with established renal failure, achieving both clinical and financial advantages, limitations to organ donation and clinical comorbidities will leave a significant proportion of patients with established renal failure requiring expensive dialysis therapy in the form of either hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis. An understanding of dialysis economics is essential for both healthcare providers and clinical leaders to establish clinically efficient and cost-effective treatment modalities that maximize service provision. In light of changes to the provision of healthcare funds in the form of “Payment by Results,” it is imperative for UK renal units to adopt clinically effective and financially accountable dialysis programs. This article explores the role of dialysis economics and implications for UK renal replacement therapy programs.

Determinantes dos gastos com diálises no Sistema Único de Saúde, Brasil, 2000 a 2004

O objetivo deste estudo é comparar os gastos ambulatoriais totais entre hemodiálise e diálise peritoneal, de 2000 a 2004, dos pacientes que iniciaram diálise, em 2000, no Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS). Foi desenvolvida coorte histórica de pacientes que iniciaram diálise em 2000, identificados por pareamento probabilístico na base de dados de Autorização de Procedimentos de Alta Complexidade/Custo (APAC). Utilizou-se modelo de regressão linear múltipla incluindo atributos individuais, clínicos e variáveis de oferta de serviços de saúde. A coorte foi constituída por 10.899 pacientes, 88,5% iniciaram em hemodiálise, e 11,5%, em diálise peritoneal. A modalidade explica 12% da variância dos gastos, os pacientes em diálise peritoneal apresentam um gasto médio anual 20% maior. Os diferenciais nos gastos são explicados pelo estado da federação e nível de oferta de serviços de saúde. As variáveis de risco individual não alteram o poder de explicação do modelo, sendo significativos a idade e a presença de diabetes mellitus. Constata-se a importância do sistema de pagamento do SUS para explicar as diferenças de gastos do tratamento dialítico no Brasil.

Cost-effectiveness of ACE inhibitor therapy to prevent dialysis in nondiabetic nephropathy: influence of the ACE insertion/deletion polymorphism

INTRODUCTION

End-stage renal disease is associated with high health-care costs and low quality of life compared with chronic kidney disease. The renoprotective effectiveness of angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEi) is largely determined by the ACE insertion/deletion (I/D) polymorphism. We determined the cost-effectiveness of ACEi therapy in nondiabetic nephropathy for the ACE II/ID and for the ACE DD genotype separately. Furthermore, we considered a selective screen-and-treat strategy in which patients are prescribed alternative, more effective, therapy based on their ACE (I/D) polymorphism.

METHODS

Time-dependent Markov models were constructed; cohorts of 1000 patients were followed for 10 years. Data were mainly gathered from the Ramipril Efficacy In Nephropathy trial. Both univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed.

RESULTS

ACEi therapy dominated placebo in both the ACE II/ID group (euro15 826, and 0.091 quality-adjusted life years gained per patient) and the ACE DD group (euro105 104 and 0.553 quality-adjusted life years gained). Sensitivity analyses showed 30.2% probability of ACEi being not cost-effective in the ACE II/ID group, against an almost 100% probability of cost-effectiveness in the ACE DD group. A selective screen-and-treat strategy should incorporate an alternative therapy for patients with the ACE II/ID genotype with an at least 9.1% increase in survival time compared with ACEi therapy to be cost-effective. Sensitivity analyses show that higher effectiveness and lower costs of the alternative therapy improve the cost-effectiveness of a screening strategy.

CONCLUSION

ACEi therapy is a cost-saving treatment compared with placebo in nondiabetic nephropathy, irrespective of ACE (I/D) genotype. However, ACEi therapy saved more costs and more health gains were achieved in the ACE DD genotype than in the ACE II/ID genotype. An alternative treatment featuring a modest increase in effectiveness compared with ACEi therapy for patients with the ACE II/ID genotype can be incorporated in a cost-effective or even cost-saving screen-and-treat strategy.

The economics of home dialysis: acting for the individual while planning responsibly for the population

Traditional medical education paradigms tend not to focus on health economics and economic evaluation. This has led to a culture in which bedside clinicians simply allocate health care resources made available to them, with often minimal input as to what these resources are at the population or health care system level. Life sustaining chronic dialysis therapies for end-stage renal disease are heterogeneous in terms of health care costs and the quality of life provided to patients receiving them. From the traditional clinician's perspective, they may be considered equivalent because there are no well-designed randomized control trials establishing the superiority of one particular dialysis modality in terms of all-cause mortality or cardiovascular events. The intent of this review is to provide clinicians practicing in the area of chronic kidney disease some insights into the concepts of economic evaluation and how it may be integrated into clinical decision making at a programmatic level while not compromising individual patient care at the bedside. An epidemiologic perspective will be used to help frame how the implementation of home dialysis modalities vary depending on local health policies in place. Lessons learned by regional nephrology care systems may be readily transferable to other jurisdictions in augmenting the uptake of home dialysis modalities where they are dwindling or struggling to grow. A high-level understanding of economic data in this area may help influence health policy in the direction of the most efficient provision of dialysis to patients while not adversely affecting their quality of life or health outcomes.

The cost-effectiveness of induction immunosuppression in kidney transplantation

BACKGROUND

Induction immunosuppression is perceived as an expensive therapy, so is often given only to select patients. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of antibody induction comparing interleukin-2 receptor antagonists (IL2Ra) to standard therapy with no induction or induction with polyclonal antibodies.

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to estimate costs and health outcomes [survival (life years saved, LYS) and quality-adjusted survival (QALYs)] for the alternative strategies. Outcome data were obtained from a meta-analysis of randomized trials and large-scale renal registries.

RESULTS

IL2Ra offers improved survival of 0.21 LYS (2.5 months) and 1.42 QALYs compared with no induction, with a cost saving over 20 years of $79,302 per patient treated regardless of risk profile. The incremental benefits of IL2Ra compared with polyclonal antibody induction therapy were 0.35 LYS (4.3 months) and 0.20 QALYs, with an incremental cost of $5144 per patient. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of IL2Ra compared to polyclonal induction was $14,803 per LYS and $25,928 per QALY. Sensitivity analyses showed that IL2Ra remained more effective and less expensive than no induction. When IL2Ra was compared to polyclonal induction, the model was sensitive to changes in the cost of induction and the probability of malignancy. Over the range of all other variables tested, IL2Ra was cost-effective compared to polyclonal induction.

CONCLUSIONS

Adopting IL2Ra as induction immunosuppression for kidney transplant recipients improves survival and QALYs and is less costly than no induction. It also represents good value for money compared to polyclonal induction.

Gaining efficiencies: resources and demand for dialysis around the globe

OBJECTIVES

End-stage renal disease (ESRD) is a debilitating condition resulting in death unless treated. Treatment options are transplantation and dialysis. Alternative dialysis modalities are peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD), each of which has been shown to produce similar outcomes and survival. Nevertheless, the financial implications of each modality are different and these differences vary by country, especially in the developing world. Changes in clinically appropriate dialysis delivery leading to more efficient use of resources would increase the resources available to treat ESRD or other disabling conditions. This article outlines the relative advantages of HD and PD and uses budget impact analysis to estimate the country-specific, 5-year financial implications on total dialysis costs assuming utilization shifts from HD to PD in two high-income (UK, Singapore), three upper-middle-income (Mexico, Chile, Romania), and three lower-middle-income (Thailand, China, Colombia) countries.

RESULTS

Peritoneal dialysis is a clinically effective dialysis option that can be significantly cost-saving compared to HD, even in developing countries.

CONCLUSIONS

The magnitude of costs associated with treating ESRD patients globally is large and growing. PD is a clinically effective dialysis option that can be used by a majority of ESRD patients and can also be significantly cost-saving compared to HD therapy. Increasing clinically appropriate PD use would substantially reduce health-care costs and help health-care systems meet ever-tightening budget constraints.

Reimbursement and economic factors influencing dialysis modality choice around the world

The worldwide incidence of kidney failure is on the rise and treatment is costly; thus, the global burden of illness is growing. Kidney failure patients require either a kidney transplant or dialysis to maintain life. This review focuses on the economics of dialysis. Alternative dialysis modalities are haemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD). Important economic factors influencing dialysis modality selection include financing, reimbursement and resource availability. In general, where there is little or no facility or physician reimbursement or payment for PD, the share of PD is very low. Regarding resource availability, when centre HD capacity is high, there is an incentive to use that capacity rather than place patients on home dialysis. In certain countries, there is interest in revising the reimbursement structure to favour home-based therapies, including PD and home HD. Modality selection is influenced by employment status, with an association between being employed and PD as the modality choice. Cost drivers differ for PD and HD. PD is driven mainly by variable costs such as solutions and tubing, while HD is driven mainly by fixed costs of facility space and staff. Many cost comparisons of dialysis modalities have been conducted. A key factor to consider in reviewing cost comparisons is the perspective of the analysis because different costs are relevant for different perspectives. In developed countries, HD is generally more expensive than PD to the payer. Additional research is needed in the developing world before conclusive statements may be made regarding the relative costs of HD and PD.

Economic evaluations of dialysis treatment modalities

OBJECTIVES

The purpose of this paper is to review published economic evaluations of dialysis treatment modalities, including hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD).

METHODS

A systematic literature review was conducted in both PubMed and EMBASE for the years 1996-2006. Articles were included if they were original research articles comparing PD and HD or comparing subtypes of PD and HD.

RESULTS

Twenty-five articles were included in the formal literature review. The majority of articles were cost evaluations, rather than full economic evaluations of both costs and outcomes. The results show that, in developed nations, HD is generally more expensive than PD to the payer. In developing and emerging economies, mainly due to inexpensive labor and high imported equipment and solution costs, PD is not infrequently perceived to be more expensive than HD. However, the costs of dialysis differ by region and additional research is needed particularly in developing economies.

CONCLUSIONS

HD is a more expensive dialysis modality in developed regions of the world. Research in the developing world is too limited to draw definitive conclusions.

The economic burden of end-stage renal disease in Canada

End-stage renal disease (ESRD) is a serious illness with significant health consequences and high-cost treatment options. This study estimates direct and indirect cost associated with ESRD from a societal perspective. A prevalence-based approach was used to estimate direct health-care costs and productivity losses from short- and long-term disability. An incident-based human capital approach was used to estimate mortality costs as the sum of the discounted present value of current and future productivity losses from premature deaths. Less than 0.1% of Canadians have ESRD; however, the disease generated direct health-care costs of $1.3 billion in the year 2000. The amount of direct spending per person with ESRD is much more than the average spending per person for all health-care conditions. Adding indirect morbidity and mortality cost brings the total burden associated with ESRD to $1.9 billion. This economic impact is higher than that for skin or infectious diseases, about the same as for genitourinary or endocrine diseases, but lower than that for conditions such as cancer or stroke. This economic weight is borne by a relatively small number of individuals. With the rapid increase in the incidence of ESRD, these findings may be useful in setting priorities for research, prevention programs, and in the planning of treatments. A better understanding of the scope and magnitude of the total economic burden of ESRD would help to inform those making policy decisions.

[Cost of dialysis in France]

The provision of care for patients with end-stage chronic renal failure is an important medical and economic challenge for the Health Insurance. Previous studies have shown a lower cost for home dialysis. More recently, studies have confirmed identical short-term survival rates between haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis. Notwithstanding, home dialysis techniques utilization remains weak in France. This work aims at: determining the average annual cost of dialysis, per patient and per technique of dialysis, and assessing the global annual cost of dialysis in France, from the Health Insurance perspective. Methodologically, this article provides a static estimation of the cost of dialysis. Costs related to co-morbidities of end-stage chronic renal failure have not been considered. Standard patient care schemes have been outlined by a multidisciplinary expert committee, for each dialysis technique, and have been valorised using publicly available data and tariffs recorded in 2005. Our result show that home dialysis techniques are the less costly, with an average annual cost per patient of 49.9, 49.7 and 50.0 k euro respectively for home haemodialysis, automated peritoneal dialysis, and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis. Autodialysis, autonomous in-center haemodialysis and in-center haemodialysis respectively cost 59.5, 62.3 and 81.5 k euro per patient and per annum. The total 2005 cost of dialysis for the Health Insurance is estimated at 2.1 billion euro. Therefore, the development of alternative techniques to in-center haemodialysis, such as home dialysis or autonomous in-center haemodialysis, autodialysis being already well developed, could generate savings for the Health Insurance. From the patient's perspective, it could also allow the enlightened choice of the best customized technique, less guided by local offer than by medical or social criteria, as well as by the patient's own opinion.

Out of touch or on the money: Do the clinical objectives of addiction treatment coincide with economic evaluation results?

Previous economic studies have examined the association between substance abuse treatment and reduced costs to society, but it remains uncertain whether the economic measures used in cost and benefit-cost analyses of treatment programs correspond in direction and magnitude with clinical outcomes. In response to this uncertainty, the present study analyzed a longitudinal data set of addiction treatment clients to determine the statistical agreement between clinical and economic outcomes over time. Data were collected from 1,326 clients in the Chicago cohort of the Persistent Effects of Treatment Study. These individuals were interviewed at baseline as well as at 6-, 24-, 36-, and 48-month followup periods (91.6% followup). Correlations between clinical and economic measures were generally small (rho of 0.1 to 0.3) and often became non-significant once we controlled for baseline severity. The results demonstrate that although some associations exist, outcomes should be evaluated along both clinical and economic dimensions.

The role of APD in the improvement of outcomes in an ESRD program

We review the role of automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) in improving outcomes of an end-stage renal disease (ESRD) program. As the "integrated care approach" becomes accepted as the preferred strategy for treatment of ESRD patients, we looked for the potential place of APD in such an approach. APD has probably the same advantages as CAPD as a first-line renal replacement modality in suitable patients willing to perform PD. There is currently no hard evidence that residual renal function (RRF) should decline more rapidly in APD than in CAPD, at least if a dry abdomen during the day is avoided. The detection of peritonitis is probably more delayed in APD, but the frequency of peritonitis is lower, and there is no hard evidence pointing to a poorer outcome of peritonitis in APD as compared to CAPD. Quality of life is at least as good in APD, which is mostly related to the increased possibilities for adapting the exchange pattern to employment-related time frames. APD also has the potential to prolong technique success in patients failing CAPD rather than transferring them to hemodialysis. Nevertheless, APD remains more expensive and technically complicated, thereby missing the beauty of CAPD's simplicity. Therefore we believe that APD has its role in an integrated approach and that all patients should be informed of its potential. It would, however, not be correct to present APD as the preferred PD method for all patients, as it also has some drawbacks that make it less suitable for some categories of patients. In all cases, patients should have a free and informed choice.