More Use of Peritoneal Dialysis Gives Significant Savings: A Systematic Review and Health Economic Decision Model

Centre variation in home dialysis uptake: A survey of kidney centre practice in relation to home dialysis organisation and delivery in England

BACKGROUND

Disparities in home dialysis uptake across England suggest inequity and unexplained variation in access. We surveyed staff at all English kidney centres to identify patterns in service organisation/delivery and explore correlations with home therapy uptake, as part of a larger study ('Inter-CEPt'), which aims to identify potentially modifiable factors to address observed variations.

METHODS

Between June and September 2022, staff working at English kidney centres were surveyed and individual responses combined into one centre-level response per question using predetermined data aggregation rules. Descriptive analysis described centre practices and their correlation with home dialysis uptake (proportion of new home dialysis starters) using 2019 UK Renal Registry 12-month home dialysis incidence data.

RESULTS

In total, 180 responses were received (50/51 centres, 98.0%). Despite varied organisation of home dialysis services, most components of service delivery and practice had minimal or weak correlations with home dialysis uptake apart from offering assisted peritoneal dialysis and 'promoting flexible decision-making about dialysis modality'. Moderate to strong correlations were identified between home dialysis uptake and centres reporting supportive clinical leadership (correlation 0.32, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): 0.05-0.55), an organisational culture that values trying new initiatives (0.57, 95% CI: 0.34-0.73); support for reflective practice (0.38, 95% CI: 0.11-0.60), facilitating research engagement (0.39, 95% CI: 0.13-0.61) and promoting continuous quality improvement (0.29, 95% CI: 0.01-0.53).

CONCLUSIONS

Uptake of home dialysis is likely to be driven by organisational culture, leadership and staff attitudes, which provide a supportive clinical environment within which specific components of service organisation and delivery can be effective.

Rapid cost-effectiveness analysis: hemodialysis versus peritoneal dialysis for patients with acute kidney injury in Rwanda

BACKGROUND

To ensure the long-term sustainability of its Community-Based Health Insurance scheme, the Government of Rwanda is working on using Health Technology Assessment (HTA) to prioritize its resources for health. The objectives of the study were to rapidly assess (1) the cost-effectiveness and (2) the budget impact of providing PD versus HD for patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) in the tertiary care setting in Rwanda.

METHODS

A rapid cost-effectiveness analysis for patients with AKI was conducted to support prioritization. An 'adaptive' HTA approach was undertaken by adjusting the international Decision Support Initiative reference case for time and data constraints. Available local and international data were used to analyze the cost-effectiveness and budget impact of peritoneal dialysis (PD) compared with hemodialysis (HD) in the tertiary hospital setting.

RESULTS

The analysis found that HD was slightly more effective and slightly more expensive in the payer perspective for most patients with AKI (aged 15-49). HD appeared to be cost-effective when only comparing these two dialysis strategies with an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of 378,174 Rwandan francs (RWF) or 367 United States dollars (US$), at a threshold of 0.5 × gross domestic product per capita (RWF 444,074 or US$431). Sensitivity analysis found that reducing the cost of HD kits would make HD even more cost-effective. Uncertainty regarding PD costs remains. Budget impact analysis demonstrated that reducing the cost of the biggest cost driver, HD kits, could produce significantly more savings in five years than switching to PD. Thus, price negotiations could significantly improve the efficiency of HD provision.

CONCLUSION

Dialysis is costly and covered by insurance in many countries for the financial protection of patients. This analysis enabled policymakers to make evidence-based decisions to improve the efficiency of dialysis provision.

Rate and reasons for peritoneal dialysis dropout following haemodialysis to peritoneal dialysis switch: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Patient experiences and survival outcomes can be influenced by the circumstances related to dialysis initiation and subsequent modality choices. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to explore the rate and reasons for peritoneal dialysis (PD) dropout following haemodialysis (HD) to PD switch.

METHOD

This systematic review conducted searches in four databases, including Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO (study ID: CRD42023405718). Outcomes included factors leading to the switch from HD to PD, the rate and reasons for PD dropout and mortality difference in two groups (PD first group versus HD to PD group). The Critical Appraisal Skills Programme (CASP) checklist and the GRADE tool were used to assess quality.

RESULTS

4971 papers were detected, and 13 studies were included. On meta-analysis, there was no statistically significant difference in PD dropout in the PD first group (OR: 0.81; 95%CI: 0.61, 1.09; I2 = 83%; P = 0.16), however, there was a statistically significant reduction in the rate of mortality (OR: 0.48; 95%CI: 0.25, 0.92; I2 = 73%; P = 0.03) compared to the HD to PD group. The primary reasons for HD to PD switch, included vascular access failure, patient preference, social issues, and cardiovascular disease. Causes for PD dropout differed between the two groups, but inadequate dialysis and peritonitis were the main reasons for PD dropout in both groups.

CONCLUSION

Compared to the PD first group, a previous HD history may not impact PD dropout rates for patients, but it could impact mortality in the HD to PD group. The reasons for PD dropout differed between the two groups, with no statistical differences. Psychosocial reasons for PD dropout are valuable to further research. Additionally, establishing a consensus on the definition of PD dropout is crucial for future studies.

A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of renal replacement therapies, and consequences for decision-making in the end-stage renal disease treatment pathway

OBJECTIVES

Comparative economic assessments of renal replacement therapies (RRT) are common and often used to inform national policy in the management of end-stage renal disease (ESRD). This study aimed to assess existing cost-effectiveness analyses of dialysis modalities and consider whether the methods applied and results obtained reflect the complexities of the real-world treatment pathway experienced by ESRD patients.

METHODS

A systematic literature review (SLR) was conducted to identify cost-effectiveness studies of dialysis modalities from 2005 onward by searching Embase, MEDLINE, EBM reviews, and EconLit. Economic evaluations were included if they compared distinct dialysis modalities (e.g. in-centre haemodialysis [ICHD], home haemodialysis [HHD] and peritoneal dialysis [PD]).

RESULTS

In total, 19 cost-effectiveness studies were identified. There was considerable heterogeneity in perspectives, time horizon, discounting, utility values, sources of clinical and economic data, and extent of clinical and economic elements included. The vast majority of studies included an incident dialysis patient population. All studies concluded that home dialysis treatment options were cost-effective interventions.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite similar findings across studies, there are a number of uncertainties about which dialysis modalities represent the most cost-effective options for patients at different points in the care pathway. Most studies included an incident patient cohort; however, in clinical practice, patients may switch between different treatment modalities over time according to their clinical need and personal circumstances. Promoting health policies through financial incentives in renal care should reflect the cost-effectiveness of a comprehensive approach that considers different RRTs along the patient pathway; however, no such evidence is currently available.

Image-guided tunneled peritoneal dialysis catheter placement

Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) often will ultimately require dialysis to survive. One type of dialysis is peritoneal dialysis (PD), which utilizes the vessel-rich peritoneum as a semi-permeable membrane to filter blood. In order to perform PD, a tunneled catheter must be placed through the abdominal wall and into the peritoneal space, with ideal positioning of the catheter within the most dependent portion of the pelvis, represented by the rectouterine or rectovesical space in women and men, respectively. There are several approaches to PD catheter insertion, including open surgical, laparoscopic surgical, blind percutaneous, and image-guided with the use of fluoroscopy techniques. Interventional radiology (through the use of image-guided percutaneous techniques) is an infrequently utilized resource to place PD catheters, and offers real-time imaging confirmation of catheter positioning with similar outcomes to more invasive surgical catheter insertion approaches. Although the vast majority of dialysis patients receive hemodialysis instead of peritoneal dialysis in the United States, some countries have moved towards a "Peritoneal Dialysis First" initiative, prioritizing initial PD, as it is less burdensome on healthcare facilities as it can be performed at home. In addition, the outbreak of the COVID-19 pandemic has produced shortages of medical supplies and delays in care delivery worldwide, while simultaneously generating a shift away from in-person medical visits and appointments. This shift may be met with more frequent utilization of imaged-guided PD catheter placement, reserving surgical and laparoscopic placement for complex patients who may require omental periprocedural revisions. This literature review outlines a brief history of PD, the various techniques of PD catheter insertion, patient selection criteria, and new COVID-19 considerations, in anticipation for the increased demand for PD in the United States.

Psychometric properties of kidney disease quality of life-36 (KDQOL-36) in dialysis patients in Indonesia

OBJECTIVE

The study aimed to evaluate the psychometric properties of KDQOL-36 Bahasa Indonesia in hemodialysis (HD) and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) patients in Indonesia.

METHODS

The psychometric analysis was conducted in three hospitals offering both HD and CAPD. The validity was assessed through structural, convergent, and known-group validity, while reliability was evaluated using internal consistency and test-retest reliability.

RESULTS

The study involved 370 participants of which 71% received HD treatment. No floor and ceiling effects (< 10%) were identified. Confirmatory factor analysis supported a good model fit for both generic and kidney-specific domains, while exploratory factor analysis revealed three factors for kidney-specific domains and only three items with a loading factor below 0.4. Convergent validity showed positive correlations between kidney-specific domains, generic domains, and EQ-5D. The comparison of quality of life among subgroups based on dialysis type and whether or not patients had diabetes supported the hypotheses of known-group validity. Cronbach's alpha and omega values had demonstrated good internal consistency. Test-retest reliability indicated burden of kidney disease had good reliability, while other domains had moderate reliability.

CONCLUSION

The study supports the validity and reliability of both generic and kidney-specific domains of KDQOL-36 Bahasa Indonesia to evaluate quality of life in patients with HD and CAPD in Indonesia. As health-related quality of life is a crucial predictor of patient outcomes, this report contributes new evidence about validity and reliability to recommend the use of KDQOL-36 Bahasa Indonesia in dialysis centers.

Impact of peritoneal dialysis modality on patient and PD survival: A systematic review

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine the effect of the peritoneal dialysis (PD) modality, automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) or continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD), on all-cause mortality (ACM) and PD failure. Studies were identified in PubMed, EMBASE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Weipu and Wanfang databases from database inception until April 1, 2021. The inclusion and exclusion criteria were based on the Population, Intervention, Comparison, Outcome, and Study (PICOS) design. Adjusted hazard ratios (HRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) were used to pool outcome estimates. Seventeen studies (more than 230,000 patients) were included. Our meta-analysis showed that compared with CAPD, APD demonstrated a significantly lower ACM risk (HR 0.87 [95% CI 0.77–0.99], p = 0.04), especially in studies involving an as-treated analysis (HR 0.75 [95% CI, 0.63–0.90], p = 0.00), published in Asia (HR 0.76 [95% CI, 0.67–0.86], p < 0.001) or Europe (HR 0.81 [95% CI, 0.74–0.89], p < 0.00), or published after 2012 (HR 0.82 [95% CI, 0.68–0.99], p = 0.04). However, APD was as effective as CAPD for PD survival (HR, 0.87 [95% CI, 0.75 to 1.00], p = 0.05 or HR, 0.90 [95% CI, 0.60 to 1.35], p = 0.61). Our results demonstrate a significant survival benefit for APD and provide evidence for increasing the global use of APD, especially in developing nations, where APD use has been hampered by a lack of reimbursement for care.

Supporting dialysis policy for end stage renal disease (ESRD) in Indonesia: an updated cost-effectiveness model

OBJECTIVE

Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) and hemodialysis (HD) are main modalities for end stage renal disease (ESRD) patients, and those have been covered by National Health Insurance (NHI) scheme since 2014 in Indonesia. This study aims to update the cost-effectiveness model of CAPD versus HD in Indonesia setting.

RESULTS

Compared to HD, CAPD provides good value for money among ESRD patients in Indonesia. Using societal perspective, the total costs were IDR 1,348,612,118 (USD 95,504) and IDR 1,368,447,750 (USD 96,908), for CAPD and HD, respectively. The QALY was slightly different between two modalities, 4.79 for CAPD versus 4.22 for HD. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) yields savings of IDR 34,723,527/QALY (USD 2460).

Economic evaluation of peritoneal dialysis and hemodialysis in Thai population with End-stage Kidney Disease

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to conduct a cost-utility analysis of the "Peritoneal Dialysis (PD)-First" policy in 2008 under a universal health coverage scheme and hemodialysis (HD) in Thai patients with End-stage Kidney Disease (ESKD) using updated real-practice data.

METHODS

Markov model was used to evaluate the cost-utility of two modalities, stratified into five age groups based on the first modality taken at 20, 30, 40, 50, and 60 years old from government and societal perspectives. Input parameters related to clinical aspects and cost were obtained from 15 hospitals throughout Thailand and Thai Renal Replacement Therapy databases. Both costs and outcomes were discounted at 3%, adjusted to 2021, and converted to USD (1 USD = 33.57 Thai Baht). One-way analysis and probabilistic sensitivity analysis were performed to assess the uncertainty surrounding model parameters.

RESULTS

From the government perspective, compared to PD-first policy, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was between 19,434 and 23,796 USD per QALY. Conversely, from a societal perspective, the ICER was between 31,913 and 39,912 USD per QALY. Both are higher than the willingness to pay threshold of 4,766 USD per QALY.

CONCLUSION

By applying the updated real-practice data, PD-first policy still remains more cost-effective than HD-first policy at the current willingness to pay. However, HD gained more quality-adjusted life years than PD. This information will assist clinicians and policymakers in determining the future direction of dialysis modality selection and kidney replacement therapy reimbursement policies for ESKD patients.

Mortality and Quality of Life with Chronic Kidney Disease: A Five-Year Cohort Study with a Sample Initially Receiving Peritoneal Dialysis

The quality of life, morbidity and mortality of people receiving renal replacement therapy is affected both by the renal disease itself and its treatment. The therapy that best improves renal function and quality of life is transplantation. Objectives: To study the quality of life, morbidity and mortality of people receiving renal replacement therapy over a five-year period. Design: A longitudinal multicentre study of a cohort of people with chronic kidney disease. Methods: Patients from the Girona health area receiving peritoneal dialysis were studied, gathering data on sociodemographic and clinical variables through an ad hoc questionnaire, quality of life using the SF-36 questionnaire, and social support with the MOS scale. Results: Mortality was 47.2%. Physical functioning was the variable that worsened most in comparison with the first measurement (p = 0.035). Those receiving peritoneal dialysis (p = 0.068) and transplant recipients (p = 0.083) had a better general health perception. The social functioning of transplant recipients improved (p = 0.008). Conclusions: People with chronic kidney disease had a high level of mortality. The dimension of physical functioning worsens over the years. Haemodialysis is the therapy that most negatively effects general health perception. Kidney transplantation has a positive effect on the dimensions of energy/vitality, social functioning and general health perception.

Financial Incentives to Facilities and Clinicians Treating Patients With End-stage Kidney Disease and Use of Home Dialysis: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Home dialysis rates for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) treatment are substantially lower in the US than in other high-income countries, yet there is limited knowledge on how to increase these rates.

Objective

To report results from the first year of a nationwide randomized clinical trial that provides financial incentives to ESKD facilities and managing clinicians to increase home dialysis rates.

Design, Setting, and Participants

Results were analyzed from the first year of the End-Stage Renal Disease Treatment Choice (ETC) model, a multiyear, mandatory-participation randomized clinical trial designed and implemented by the US Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation. Data were reported on Medicare patients with ESKD 66 years or older who initiated treatment with dialysis in 2021, with data collection through December 31, 2021; the study included all eligible ESKD facilities and managing clinicians. Eligible hospital referral regions (HRRs) were randomly assigned to the ETC (91 HRRs) or a control group (211 HRRs).

Interventions

The ESKD facilities and managing clinicians received financial incentives for home dialysis use.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcome was the percentage of patients with ESKD who received any home dialysis during the first 90 days of treatment. Secondary outcomes included other measures of home dialysis and patient volume and characteristics.

Results

Among the 302 HRRs eligible for randomization, 18 621 eligible patients initiated dialysis treatment during the study period (mean [SD] age, 74.8 [1.05] years; 7856 women [42.1%]; 10 765 men [57.9%]; 859 Asian [5.2%], 3280 [17.7%] Black, 730 [4.3%] Hispanic, 239 North American Native, and 12 394 managing clinicians. The mean (SD) share of patients with any home dialysis during the first 90 days was 20.6% (7.8%) in the control group and was 0.12 percentage points higher (95% CI, -1.42 to 1.65 percentage points; P = .88) in the ETC group, a statistically nonsignificant difference. None of the secondary outcomes differed significantly between groups.

Conclusions and Relevance

The trial results found that in the first year of the US Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation-designed ETC model, HRRs assigned to the model did not have statistically significantly different rates in home dialysis compared with control HRRs. This raises questions about the efficacy of the financial incentives provided, although further evaluation is needed, as the size of these incentives will increase in subsequent years.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05005572.

Outcome Analysis of Transition From Peritoneal Dialysis to Hemodialysis: A Population-Based Study

If a technical failure occurs during peritoneal dialysis (PD), the patients undergoing PD may be transitioned to hemodialysis (HD). However, the clinical outcomes of patients who have undergone such a transition are under studied. This study assessed whether patients undergoing HD who have transitioned from PD have the same clinical outcomes as HD-only patients. This research was a retrospective cohort study by searching a National Health Insurance research database for data on patients in Taiwan who had undergone HD between January 2006 and December 2013. The patients were divided into two groups, namely a case group in which the patients were transitioned from PD to HD and a HD-only control group, through propensity score matching at a ratio of 1:4 (n = 1,100 vs. 4,400, respectively). We used the Cox regression model to estimate the hazard ratios (HRs) for all-cause death, all-cause hospitalization, infection-related admission, and major adverse cardiac events (MACE). Those selected patients will be followed until death or the end of the study period (December, 2017), whichever occurs first. Over a mean follow-up of 3.2 years, 1,695 patients (30.8%) died, 3,825 (69.5%) required hospitalization, and 1,142 (20.8%) experienced MACE. Patients transitioning from PD had a higher risk of all-cause death (HR: 1.36; 95% CI: 1.21–1.53) than HD-only patients. However, no significant difference was noted in terms of MACE (HR: 0.91; 95% CI: 0.73–1.12), all-cause hospitalization (HR: 1.07; 95% CI: 0.96–1.18), or infection-related admission (HR: 0.97, 95% CI: 0.80–1.18) between groups. Because of the violation of the proportional hazard assumption, the piecewise-HRs showed that the risk of mortality in the case group was significant within 5 months of the transition (HR: 2.61; 95% CI: 2.04–3.35) not in other partitions of the time axis. In conclusion, patients undergoing HD who transitioned from PD had a higher risk of death than the HD-only patients, especially in the first 5 months after transition (a 161% higher risk). Therefore, more caution and monitoring may be required for patients undergoing HD who transitioned from PD.

Intervening to eliminate the centre-effect variation in home dialysis use: protocol for Inter-CEPt-a sequential mixed-methods study designing an intervention bundle

INTRODUCTION

Use of home dialysis by centres in the UK varies considerably and is decreasing despite attempts to encourage greater use. Knowing what drives this unwarranted variation requires in-depth understanding of centre cultural and organisational factors and how these relate to quantifiable centre performance, accounting for competing treatment options. This knowledge will be used to identify components of a practical and feasible intervention bundle ensuring this is realistic and cost-effective.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Underpinned by the non-adoption, abandonment, scale-up, spread and sustainability framework, our research will use an exploratory sequential mixed-methods approach. Insights from multisited focused team ethnographic and qualitative research at four case study sites will inform development of a national survey of 52 centres. Survey results, linked to patient-level data from the UK Renal Registry, will populate a causal graph describing patient and centre-level factors, leading to uptake of home dialysis and multistate models incorporating patient-level treatment modality history and mortality. This will inform a contemporary economic evaluation of modality cost-effectiveness that will quantify how modification of factors facilitating home dialysis, identified from the ethnography and survey, might yield the greatest improvements in costs, quality of life and numbers on home therapies. Selected from these factors, using the capability, opportunity and motivation for behaviour change framework (COM-B) for intervention design, the optimal intervention bundle will be developed through workshops with patients and healthcare professionals to ensure acceptability and feasibility. Patient and public engagement and involvement is embedded throughout the project.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval has been granted by the Health Research Authority reference 20-WA-0249. The intervention bundle will comprise components for all stake holder groups: commissioners, provider units, recipients of dialysis, their caregivers and families. To reache all these groups, a variety of knowledge exchange methods will be used: short guides, infographics, case studies, National Institute for Health and Care Excellence guidelines, patient conferences, 'Getting it Right First Time' initiative, Clinical Reference Group (dialysis).

Cost Effectiveness of Dapagliflozin Added to Standard of Care for the Management of Diabetic Nephropathy in the USA

BACKGROUND

Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors have been used as the standard of care for the treatment of diabetic nephropathy. Recently, dapagliflozin has been shown to reduce diabetic nephropathy when added to the standard of care.

OBJECTIVE

The objective of this study was to determine the cost effectiveness of dapagliflozin added to the standard of care in diabetic nephropathy in the United States of America (USA).

METHODS

A Markov model was developed to determine the cost-effectiveness outcomes from the Medicare/Medicaid health coverage perspective. Model inputs were derived from the literature. The primary outcomes were total costs, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs), and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to determine the robustness of our results. A willingness-to-pay threshold of $100,000 per QALY was applied, which is based on previous studies.

RESULTS

Dapagliflozin yielded a lifetime QALY of 2.8. The discounted QALY associated with the standard of care was 2.6. The standard of care was the less costly treatment with a lifetime cost of $106,150.25 as compared with dapagliflozin, which costs $110,689.25. Dapagliflozin demonstrated an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of $21,141.51 per additional QALY. The most influential parameters of the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio were the adverse drug reaction-related cost of the standard of care and dapagliflozin, the acquisition cost, and the adverse drug reaction-related cost of dapagliflozin. The effects and costs of the interventions were consistent between base-case analyses and the probabilistic model (incremental cost-effectiveness ratio: $19,023.35 [$13,637.8-$27,483.1]).

CONCLUSIONS

Dapagliflozin added to the standard of care was cost effective relative to the standard of care alone in the USA for patients with diabetic nephropathy.

Cost Barriers to More Widespread Use of Peritoneal Dialysis in the United States

The United States Department of Health and Human Services launched the Advancing American Kidney Health Initiative in 2019, which included a goal of transforming dialysis care from an in-center to a largely home-based dialysis program. A substantial motivator for this transition is the potential to reduce costs of ESKD care with peritoneal dialysis. Studies demonstrating that peritoneal dialysis is less costly than in-center hemodialysis have often focused on the perspective of the payer, whereas less consideration has been given to the costs of those who are more directly involved in treatment decision making, including patients, caregivers, physicians, and dialysis facilities. We review comparisons of peritoneal dialysis and in-center hemodialysis costs, focusing on costs incurred by the people and organizations making decisions about dialysis modality, to highlight the financial barriers toward increased adoption of peritoneal dialysis. We specifically address misaligned economic incentives, underappreciated costs for key stakeholders involved in peritoneal dialysis delivery, differences in provider costs, and transition costs. We conclude by offering policy suggestions that include improving data collection to better understand costs in peritoneal dialysis, and sharing potential savings among all stakeholders, to incentivize a transition to peritoneal dialysis.

Peritoneal Dialysis for Potential Kidney Transplant Recipients: Pride or Prejudice?

Kidney transplantation (KT) is recognized as the gold-standard of treatment for patients with end-stage renal disease. Additionally, it has been demonstrated that receiving a pre-emptive KT ensures the best recipient and graft survivals. However, due to an overwhelming discrepancy between the organs available and the patients on the transplant waiting list, the vast majority of transplant candidates require prolonged periods of dialysis before being transplanted. For many years, peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD) have been considered competitive renal replacement therapies (RRT). This dualistic vision has recently been questioned by evidence suggesting that an individualized and flexible approach may be more appropriate. In fact, tailored and cleverly planned changes between different RRT modalities, according to the patient’s needs and characteristics, are often needed in order to achieve the best results. While home HD is still under scrutiny in this particular setting, current data seems to favor the use of PD over in-center HD in patients awaiting a KT. In this specific population, the demonstrated advantages of PD are superior quality of life, longer preservation of residual renal function, lower incidence of delayed graft function, better recipient survival, and reduced cost.

Current costs of dialysis modalities: A comprehensive analysis within the United Kingdom

Background:

Previous evidence suggests home-based dialysis to be more cost-effective than unit-based or hospital-based dialysis. However, previous analyses to quantify the costs of different dialysis modalities have used varied perspectives, different methods, and required assumptions due to lack of available data. The National Institute for Health and Care Excellence reports uncertainty about the differences in costs between home-based and unit-based dialysis. This uncertainty limits the ability of policy makers to make recommendations based on cost effectiveness, which also impacts on the ability of budget holders to model the impact of any service redesign and to understand which therapies deliver better value. The aim of our study was to use a combination of top-down and bottom-up costing methods to determine the direct medical costs of different dialysis modalities in one UK nation (Wales) from the perspective of the National Health Service (NHS).

Methods:

Detailed hybrid top-down and bottom-up micro-costing methods were applied to estimate the direct medical costs of dialysis modalities across Wales. Micro-costing data was obtained from commissioners of the service and from interviews with renal consultants, nurses, accountants, managers and allied health professionals. Top-down costing information was obtained from the Welsh Renal Clinical Network (who commission renal services across Wales) and the Welsh Ambulance Service Trust.

Results:

The annual direct cost per patient for home-based modalities was £16,395 for continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD), £20,295 for automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) and £23,403 for home-based haemodialysis (HHD). The annual cost per patient for unit-based modalities depended on whether or not patients required ambulance transport. Excluding transport, the cost of dialysis was £19,990 for satellite units run in partnership with independent sector providers and £23,737 for hospital units managed and staffed by the NHS. When ambulance transport was included, the respective costs were £28,931 and £32,678, respectively.

Conclusion:

Our study is the most comprehensive analysis of the costs of dialysis undertaken thus far in the United Kingdom and clearly demonstrate that CAPD is less costly than other dialysis modalities. When ambulance transport costs are included, other home therapies (APD and HHD) are also less costly than unit-based dialysis. This detailed analysis of the components that contribute to dialysis costs will help inform future cost-effectiveness studies, inform healthcare policy and drive service redesign.

Understanding Home Hemodialysis Patient Attrition: A Cohort Study

Background:

Home hemodialysis (HHD) offers a flexible, patient-centered modality for patients with kidney failure. Growth in HHD is achieved by increasing the number of patients starting HHD and reducing attrition with strategies to prevent the modifiable reasons for loss.

Objective:

Our primary objective was to describe a Canadian HHD population in terms of technique failure and time to exit from HHD in order to understand reasons for exit. Our secondary objectives include the following: (1) determining reasons for training failure, (2) reasons for early exit from HHD, and (3) timing of program exit.

Design:

A retrospective cohort study of incident adult HHD patients between January 1, 2013—June 30, 2020.

Setting:

Alberta Kidney Care South, AKC-S HHD program.

Participants:

Patients who started training for HHD in AKC-S.

Methods:

A retrospective, cohort study of incident adult HHD patients with primary outcome time on home hemodialysis, secondary outcomes include reason for train failure, time to and reasons for technique failure. Cox-proportional hazard model to determine associations between patient characteristics and technique failure. The cumulative probability of technique failure over time was reported using a competing risks model.

Results:

A total of 167 patients entered HHD. Training failure occurred in 20 (12%), at 3.1 [2.0, 5.5] weeks; these patients were older (P < .001) and had 2 or more comorbidities (P < .001). Reasons for HHD exit after training included transplant (35; 21%), death (8; 4.8%), and technique failure (24; 14.4%). Overall, the median time to HHD exit, was 23 months [11, 41] and the median time of technique failure was 17 months [8.9, 36]. Reasons for technique failure included: psychosocial reasons (37%) at a median time 8.9 months [7.7, 13], safety (12.5%) at 19 months [19, 36], and medical (37.5%) at 26 months [11, 50].

Limitations:

Small patient population with quality of data limited by the electronic-based medical record and non-standardized definitions of reasons for exit.

Conclusions:

Training failure is a particularly important source of patient loss. Reasons for exit differ according to duration on HHD. Early interventions aimed at reducing train failure and increasing psychosocial supports may help program growth.

Home Versus Facility Dialysis and Mortality in Australia and New Zealand

RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE

Mortality is an important outcome for all dialysis stakeholders. We examined associations between dialysis modality and mortality in the modern era.

STUDY DESIGN

Observational study comparing dialysis inception cohorts 1998-2002, 2003-2007, 2008-2012, and 2013-2017.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Australia and New Zealand (ANZ) dialysis population.

EXPOSURE

The primary exposure was dialysis modality: facility hemodialysis (HD), continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD), automated PD (APD), or home HD.

OUTCOME

The main outcome was death.

ANALYTICAL METHODS

Cause-specific proportional hazards models with shared frailty and subdistribution proportional hazards (Fine and Gray) models, adjusting for available confounding covariates.

RESULTS

In 52,097 patients, the overall death rate improved from ~15 deaths per 100 patient-years in 1998-2002 to ~11 in 2013-2017, with the largest cause-specific contribution from decreased infectious death. Relative to facility HD, mortality with CAPD and APD has improved over the years, with adjusted hazard ratios in 2013-2017 of 0.88 (95% CI, 0.78-0.99) and 0.91 (95% CI, 0.82-1.00), respectively. Increasingly, patients with lower clinical risk have been adopting APD, and to a lesser extent CAPD. Relative to facility HD, mortality with home HD was lower throughout the entire period of observation, despite increasing adoption by older patients and those with more comorbidities. All effects were generally insensitive to the modeling approach (initial vs time-varying modality, cause-specific versus subdistribution regression), different follow-up time intervals (5 year vs 7 year vs 10 year). There was no effect modification by diabetes, comorbidity, or sex.

LIMITATIONS

Potential for residual confounding, limited generalizability.

CONCLUSIONS

The survival of patients on PD in 2013-2017 appears greater than the survival for patients on facility HD in ANZ. Additional research is needed to assess whether changing clinical risk profiles over time, varied dialysis prescription, and morbidity from dialysis access contribute to these findings.

Comparison of shared decision making in patients undergoing hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis for choosing a dialysis modality

Background

Shared decision making (SDM) is recognized as the gold standard for patient-centered care. This study aimed to assess and compare the SDM among patients undergoing hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis for choosing a dialysis modality.

Methods

This is a cross-sectional study that was performed on 300 dialysis patients (218 HD and 82 PD) referred to two Dialysis Centers. Data were collected using demographic information and a 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9). The data were analyzed using ANOVA and independent t-test by SPSS software.

Results

The mean SDM-Q-9 score in all samples (PD and HD) was 21.94 ± 15.08 (in a possible range of 0 to 45). Results of the independent t-test showed that the mean SDM-Q-9 score in PD patients (33.11 ± 10.08) was higher than HD patients (17.14 ± 74.24) (p < 0.001). The results showed a statistically significant difference in mean SDM-Q-9 score based on patients’ age, educational level, and income (p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Implementing shared decision making and providing information on RRT should be started in the early stage of CKD. The health care providers should involve patients with CKD and their families in dialysis-related decisions and it should be started in the early stage of CKD.

Options of Renal Replacement Therapy in CKDu

Patients with advanced Chronic Kidney Disease of Unknown origin (CKDu) need to plan for renal replacement therapy. The patients usually affected are probably best served with living-related renal transplantation. Potential donors from the same area are possibly at risk for developing CKDu and need close monitoring post kidney donation. Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is probably a better option as hemodialysis (HD) centers are located in urban areas only and patients have the convenience of receiving therapy at home. The “PD first” pilot project of Sri Lanka is a unique initiative that trains community physicians to offer PD to patients with advanced CKDu. In Telengana and Andhra Pradesh, the Aarogyasri insurance scheme provides for poor patients to avail of free HD and transplantation in government and private hospitals. Much more needs to be done to care for all those who are affected. A public–private partnership model for providing comprehensive care to patients with advanced CKDu can be undertaken in all areas affected by CKDu that makes renal replacement therapy (RRT) available and accessible, irrespective of financial and social limitations.

A Comparison of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures of Quality of Life By Dialysis Modality in the Treatment of Kidney Failure: A Systematic Review

Background:

There is an increasing demand to incorporate patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) such as quality of life (QOL) in decision-making when selecting a chronic dialysis modality.

Objective:

To compare the change in QOL over time among similar patients on different dialysis modalities to provide unique and novel insights on the impact of dialysis modality on PROMs.

Design:

Systematic reviews, randomized controlled trials, and nonrandomized controlled trials were examined via a comprehensive search strategy incorporating multiple bibliographic databases.

Setting:

Data were extracted from relevant studies from January 1, 2000 to December 31, 2019 without limitations on country of study conduction.

Patients:

Eligible studies included adults (≥18 years) with end-stage kidney disease of any cause who were prescribed dialysis treatment (either as lifetime treatment or bridge to transplant).

Measurements:

The 5 comparisons were peritoneal dialysis (PD) vs in-center hemodialysis (ICHD), home hemodialysis (HHD) vs ICHD, HHD modalities compared with one another, HHD vs PD, and self-care ICHD vs traditional nurse-based ICHD.

Methods:

Included studies compared adults on different dialysis modalities with repeat measures within individuals to determine changes in QOL between dialysis modalities (in-center or home dialysis). Methodological quality was assessed by the Scottish Intercollegiate Guidelines Network (SIGN 50) checklist. A narrative synthesis was conducted, synthesizing the direction and size of any observed effects across studies.

Results:

Two randomized controlled trials and 9 prospective cohort studies involving a combined total of 3711 participants were included. Comparing PD and ICHD, 5 out of 9 studies found significant differences (P < .05) favoring PD in the change of multiple QOL domains, including “physical component score,” “role of social component score,” “cognitive status,” “role limitation due to emotional function,” “role limitation due to physical function,” “bodily pain,” “burden of kidney disease,” “effects of kidney disease on daily life,” “symptoms/problems,” “sexual function,” “finance,” and “patient satisfaction.” Conversely, 3 of these studies demonstrated statistically significant differences (P < .05) favoring ICHD in the domains of “role limitation due to physical function,” “general health,” “support from staff,” “sleep quality,” “social support,” “health status,” “social interaction,” “body image,” and “overall health.” Comparing HHD and ICHD, significant differences (P < .05) favoring HHD for the QOL domains of “general health,” “burden of kidney disease,” and the visual analogue scale were reported.

Limitations:

Our study is constrained by the small sample sizes of included studies, as well as heterogeneity among both study populations and validated QOL scales, limiting inter-study comparison.

Conclusions:

We identified differences in specific QOL domains between dialysis modalities that may aid in patient decision-making based on individual priorities.

Trial registration:

PROSPERO Registration Number: CRD42016046980.

Primary funding source:

The original research for this study was derived from the Canadian Agency for Drugs and Technologies in Health (CADTH) 2017 optimal use report, titled “Dialysis Modalities for the Treatment of End-Stage Kidney Disease: A Health Technology Assessment.” The CADTH receives funding from Canada’s federal, provincial, and territorial governments, with the exception of Quebec.

Increasing access to integrated ESKD care as part of universal health coverage

The global nephrology community recognizes the need for a cohesive strategy to address the growing problem of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). In March 2018, the International Society of Nephrology hosted a summit on integrated ESKD care, including 92 individuals from around the globe with diverse expertise and professional backgrounds. The attendees were from 41 countries, including 16 participants from 11 low- and lower-middle-income countries. The purpose was to develop a strategic plan to improve worldwide access to integrated ESKD care, by identifying and prioritizing key activities across 8 themes: (i) estimates of ESKD burden and treatment coverage, (ii) advocacy, (iii) education and training/workforce, (iv) financing/funding models, (v) ethics, (vi) dialysis, (vii) transplantation, and (viii) conservative care. Action plans with prioritized lists of goals, activities, and key deliverables, and an overarching performance framework were developed for each theme. Examples of these key deliverables include improved data availability, integration of core registry measures and analysis to inform development of health care policy; a framework for advocacy; improved and continued stakeholder engagement; improved workforce training; equitable, efficient, and cost-effective funding models; greater understanding and greater application of ethical principles in practice and policy; definition and application of standards for safe and sustainable dialysis treatment and a set of measurable quality parameters; and integration of dialysis, transplantation, and comprehensive conservative care as ESKD treatment options within the context of overall health priorities. Intended users of the action plans include clinicians, patients and their families, scientists, industry partners, government decision makers, and advocacy organizations. Implementation of this integrated and comprehensive plan is intended to improve quality and access to care and thereby reduce serious health-related suffering of adults and children affected by ESKD worldwide.

Quality of Life and Social Support of People on Peritoneal Dialysis: Mixed Methods Research

Although some study has been made into quality of life in patients with peritoneal dialysis, little is known about how this relates to social support. The aim of this paper was to study health-related quality of life, perceived social support and the experiences of people receiving peritoneal dialysis. A cross-sectional study was conducted using quantitative and qualitative methodologies, between June 2015 and March 2017. Fifty-five patients receiving peritoneal dialysis were studied. The most affected quality of life dimensions were the effects of the disease, the burden of the disease, occupational status, sleep and satisfaction. The physical component of the quality of life questionnaire was negatively associated with the number of hospital admissions over the previous year (p = 0.027) and positively associated with social support (p = 0.002). With regard to the mental component, age (p = 0.010) and social support (p = 0.041) were associated with a better quality of life. Peritoneal dialysis, while not a panacea, is experienced as being less aggressive than hemodialysis, allowing greater autonomy and improved perceived health. Greater symptomology corresponded to worse quality of life and to perceiving the disease as a burden. Patients had to adapt to the new situation despite their expectations. Social support was observed to be a key factor in perceived quality of life.

Urgent-start peritoneal dialysis: is it ready for prime time?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to provide an up-to-date summary of the definition, current practice and evidence regarding the role of urgent-start peritoneal dialysis (USPD) in patients with end-stage kidney disease who present with unplanned dialysis requirement without functional access.

RECENT FINDINGS

USPD can be broadly defined as peritoneal dialysis initiation within the first 2 weeks after catheter insertion. Published practice patterns, in terms of catheter insertion approach, peritoneal dialysis initiation time or initial fill volume, are highly variable. Most evidence comes from small, retrospective, single-center observational studies and only one randomized controlled trial. Compared with conventional-start peritoneal dialysis, USPD appears to moderately increase the risk of mechanical complications, such as dialysate leak (relative risk 3.21, 95% confidence interval 1.73-5.95), but does not appear to adversely affect technique or patient survival. USPD may also reduce the risk of bacteremia compared with urgent-start hemodialysis delivered by central venous catheter (CVC).

SUMMARY

USPD represents an important opportunity to establish patients with urgent, unplanned dialysis requirements on a cost-effective, home-based dialysis modality with lower serious infection risks than the alternative option of hemodialysis via CVC. Robust, well executed trials are required to better inform optimal practice and safeguard patient-centered and patient-reported outcomes.

Effect of Low-Sodium versus Conventional Sodium Dialysate on Left Ventricular Mass in Home and Self-Care Satellite Facility Hemodialysis Patients: A Randomized Clinical Trial

BACKGROUND

Fluid overload in patients undergoing hemodialysis contributes to cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. There is a global trend to lower dialysate sodium with the goal of reducing fluid overload.

METHODS

To investigate whether lower dialysate sodium during hemodialysis reduces left ventricular mass, we conducted a randomized trial in which patients received either low-sodium dialysate (135 mM) or conventional dialysate (140 mM) for 12 months. We included participants who were aged >18 years old, had a predialysis serum sodium ≥135 mM, and were receiving hemodialysis at home or a self-care satellite facility. Exclusion criteria included hemodialysis frequency >3.5 times per week and use of sodium profiling or hemodiafiltration. The main outcome was left ventricular mass index by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging.

RESULTS

The 99 participants had a median age of 51 years old; 67 were men, 31 had diabetes mellitus, and 59 had left ventricular hypertrophy. Over 12 months of follow-up, relative to control, a dialysate sodium concentration of 135 mmol/L did not change the left ventricular mass index, despite significant reductions at 6 and 12 months in interdialytic weight gain, in extracellular fluid volume, and in plasma B-type natriuretic peptide concentration (ratio of intervention to control). The intervention increased intradialytic hypotension (odds ratio [OR], 7.5; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 1.1 to 49.8 at 6 months and OR, 3.6; 95% CI, 0.5 to 28.8 at 12 months). Five participants in the intervention arm could not complete the trial because of hypotension. We found no effect on health-related quality of life measures, perceived thirst or xerostomia, or dietary sodium intake.

CONCLUSIONS

Dialysate sodium of 135 mmol/L did not reduce left ventricular mass relative to control, despite improving fluid status.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY NAME AND REGISTRATION NUMBER

The Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, ACTRN12611000975998.

An opportunity for improved engagement and transparency: A systematic review of renal dialysis cost effectiveness and discrete choice experiment studies

Much attention is given to patient and provider engagement, cost, and quality. Nephrology is in a unique position to examine the intersection of these issues given kidney dialysis is delivered at a high cost to chronically ill patients. Annual dialysis treatments in Canada range from $56,000-$107,000 per patient dependent on modality. Economists quantify the preferred modality by calculating cost effectiveness through quality-adjusted life years or determining utilization through Discrete Choice Experiments (DCEs). Cost-effectiveness studies identify peritoneal dialysis as the most economical, yet it is the least used. Discrete choice experiments address patient preferences but rarely include cost attributes. This presents a unique paradigm: cost studies do not include patient or physician perspectives, and DCEs do not consider cost. This systematic review of dialysis cost-effectiveness studies and DCEs identifies an opportunity to increase engagement and transparency by involving all care partners in assessing quality and cost.

Framework for establishing integrated kidney care programs in low- and middle-income countries

Secular increases in the burden of kidney failure is a major challenge for health systems worldwide, especially in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) due to growing demand for expensive kidney replacement therapies. In LMICs with limited resources, the priority of providing kidney replacement therapies must be weighed against the prevention and treatment of chronic kidney disease, other kidney disorders such as acute kidney injury, and other noncommunicable diseases, as well as other urgent public health needs. Kidney failure is potentially preventable-not just through primary prevention of risk factors for kidney disease such as hypertension and diabetes, but also by timely management of established chronic kidney disease. Among people with established or incipient kidney failure, there are 3 key treatment strategies-conservative care, kidney transplantation, and dialysis-each of which has its own benefits. Joining up preventive care for people with or at risk for milder forms of chronic kidney disease with all 3 therapies for kidney failure (and developing synergistic links between the different treatment options) is termed "integrated kidney care" and has potential benefits for patients, families, and providers. In addition, because integrated kidney care implicitly considers resource use, it should facilitate a more sustainable approach to managing kidney failure than providing one or more of its components separately. There is currently no agreed framework that LMIC governments can use to establish and/or scale up programs to prevent and treat kidney failure or join up these programs to provide integrated kidney care. This review presents a suggested framework for establishing integrated kidney care programs, focusing on the anticipated needs of policy makers in LMICs.

The benefit of early survival on PD versus HD—Why this is (still) very important

There are a number of misconceptions around the identified early survival benefit of peritoneal dialysis (PD) relative to hemodialysis (HD), including that such benefits “even out in the end” since the relative risk of death over time eventually encompasses 1.0 (or even an estimate that is unfavorable to PD); that the early benefit is, in fact, most likely due to unmeasured confounding; and such benefits are only due to the influence of central venous catheters and “crash starters” in the HD group. In fact, the early survival benefit results in a substantial gain of patient life years in PD cohorts relative to HD ones, even if it the benefit appears to “even out in the end,” is relatively insensitive to unmeasured confounding, and persists even when the effects of central venous catheters are accounted for. In this review, the calculations and arguments are made to support these tenets. Survival on dialysis is still one of the most important considerations for all stakeholders in the end-stage kidney disease community, including patients who rank it among their top priorities. Shared decision-making is a fundamental patient right and requires both balanced information and an iterative mechanism for a consensual decision based on shared understanding and purpose. A cornerstone of this process should be an explicit discussion of the early survival benefit of PD relative to HD.

Economic Modelling of Chronic Kidney Disease: A Systematic Literature Review to Inform Conceptual Model Design

BACKGROUND

Chronic kidney disease (CKD) is a progressive condition that leads to irreversible damage to the kidneys and is associated with an increased incidence of cardiovascular events and mortality. As novel interventions become available, estimates of economic and clinical outcomes are needed to guide payer reimbursement decisions.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of the present study was to systematically review published economic models that simulated long-term outcomes of kidney disease to inform cost-effectiveness evaluations of CKD treatments.

METHODS

The review was conducted across four databases (MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane library and EconLit) and health technology assessment agency websites. Relevant information on each model was extracted. Transition and mortality rates were also extracted to assess the choice of model parameterisation on disease progression by simulating patient's time with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) and time to ESRD/death. The incorporation of cardiovascular disease in a population with CKD was qualitatively assessed across identified models.

RESULTS

The search identified 101 models that met the criteria for inclusion. Models were classified into CKD models (n = 13), diabetes models with nephropathy (n = 48), ESRD-only models (n = 33) and cardiovascular models with CKD components (n = 7). Typically, published models utilised frameworks based on either (estimated or measured) glomerular filtration rate (GFR) or albuminuria, in line with clinical guideline recommendations for the diagnosis and monitoring of CKD. Generally, two core structures were identified, either a microsimulation model involving albuminuria or a Markov model utilising CKD stages and a linear GFR decline (although further variations on these model structures were also identified). Analysis of parameter variability in CKD disease progression suggested that mean time to ESRD/death was relatively consistent across model types (CKD models 28.2 years; diabetes models with nephropathy 24.6 years). When evaluating time with ESRD, CKD models predicted extended ESRD survival over diabetes models with nephropathy (mean time with ESRD 8.0 vs. 3.8 years).

DISCUSSION

This review provides an overview of how CKD is typically modelled. While common frameworks were identified, model structure varied, and no single model type was used for the modelling of patients with CKD. In addition, many of the current methods did not explicitly consider patient heterogeneity or underlying disease aetiology, except for diabetes. However, the variability of individual patients' GFR and albuminuria trajectories perhaps provides rationale for a model structure designed around the prediction of individual patients' GFR trajectories. Frameworks of future CKD models should be informed and justified based on clinical rationale and availability of data to ensure validity of model results. In addition, further clinical and observational research is warranted to provide a better understanding of prognostic factors and data sources to improve economic modelling accuracy in CKD.

Cost utility analysis of end stage renal disease treatment in Ministry of Health dialysis centres, Malaysia: Hemodialysis versus continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis

Objectives

In Malaysia, there is exponential growth of patients on dialysis. Dialysis treatment consumes a considerable portion of healthcare expenditure. Comparative assessment of their cost effectiveness can assist in providing a rational basis for preference of dialysis modalities.

Methods

A cost utility study of hemodialysis (HD) and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) was conducted from a Ministry of Health (MOH) perspective. A Markov model was also developed to investigate the cost effectiveness of increasing uptake of incident CAPD to 55% and 60% versus current practice of 40% CAPD in a five-year temporal horizon. A scenario with 30% CAPD was also measured. The costs and utilities were sourced from published data which were collected as part of this study. The transitional probabilities and survival estimates were obtained from the Malaysia Dialysis and Transplant Registry (MDTR). The outcome measures were cost per life year (LY), cost per quality adjusted LY (QALY) and incremental cost effectiveness ratio (ICER) for the Markov model. Sensitivity analyses were performed.

Results

LYs saved for HD was 4.15 years and 3.70 years for CAPD. QALYs saved for HD was 3.544 years and 3.348 for CAPD. Cost per LY saved was RM39,791 for HD and RM37,576 for CAPD. The cost per QALY gained was RM46,595 for HD and RM41,527 for CAPD. The Markov model showed commencement of CAPD in 50% of ESRD patients as initial dialysis modality was very cost-effective versus current practice of 40% within MOH. Reduction in CAPD use was associated with higher costs and a small devaluation in QALYs.

Conclusions

These findings suggest provision of both modalities is fiscally feasible; increasing CAPD as initial dialysis modality would be more cost-effective.

Cost Effectiveness of Dialysis Modalities: A Systematic Review of Economic Evaluations

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

The economic burden of providing maintenance dialysis to those with end-stage kidney disease continues to increase. Home dialysis, including both haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, is commonly assumed to be more cost effective than facility dialysis, with some countries adopting a home-first policy in an attempt to reduce costs. However, the cost effectiveness of this approach is uncertain. The aim of this study is to review all published cost-effectiveness analyses comparing all alternative dialysis modalities for people with end-stage kidney disease.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review of MEDLINE, the National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database, and Health Technology Assessment Database from the Centre of Reviews and Dissemination, The Cochrane Library and Econlit from January 2000 to December 2017. Published economic evaluations were included if they provided comparative information on the costs and health outcomes of alternative dialysis modalities.

RESULTS

The review identified 16 economic evaluations comparing dialysis modalities from both high- and low-income countries. The majority (69%) were undertaken solely from the perspective of the payer or service provider, 14 (88%) included a cost-utility analysis and eight (50%) were modelled evaluations. The studies addressed costs and health outcomes of multiple dialysis modalities, with many reporting average cost effectiveness rather than incremental cost effectiveness. Almost all evaluations suggest home dialysis to be less costly and to offer comparable or better health outcomes than in-centre haemodialysis. However, the quality-of-life benefit for each modality was poorly defined and inconsistent in terms of magnitude and direction of differences between modalities and across studies. Other issues include exclusion of competing modalities and use of arbitrary assumptions with regard to the mix of modalities.

CONCLUSIONS

The ability to identify the mix of dialysis modalities that provides best outcomes for patients and health budgets is uncertain particularly given the lack of societal perspectives and inconsistencies between published studies.

Dialysis initiation, modality choice, access, and prescription: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference

Globally, the number of patients undergoing maintenance dialysis is increasing, yet throughout the world there is significant variability in the practice of initiating dialysis. Factors such as availability of resources, reasons for starting dialysis, timing of dialysis initiation, patient education and preparedness, dialysis modality and access, as well as varied "country-specific" factors significantly affect patient experiences and outcomes. As the burden of end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) has increased globally, there has also been a growing recognition of the importance of patient involvement in determining the goals of care and decisions regarding treatment. In January 2018, KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) convened a Controversies Conference focused on dialysis initiation, including modality choice, access, and prescription. Here we present a summary of the conference discussions, including identified knowledge gaps, areas of controversy, and priorities for research. A major novel theme represented during the conference was the need to move away from a "one-size-fits-all" approach to dialysis and provide more individualized care that incorporates patient goals and preferences while still maintaining best practices for quality and safety. Identifying and including patient-centered goals that can be validated as quality indicators in the context of diverse health care systems to achieve equity of outcomes will require alignment of goals and incentives between patients, providers, regulators, and payers that will vary across health care jurisdictions.

International Variations in Peritoneal Dialysis Utilization and Implications for Practice

In many countries, the use of peritoneal dialysis (PD) remains low despite arguments that support its greater use, including dialysis treatment away from hospital settings, avoidance of central venous catheters, and potential health economic advantages. Training patients to manage aspects of their own care has the potential to enhance health literacy and increase patient involvement, independence, quality of life, and cost-effectiveness of care. Complex reasons underlie the variable use of PD across the world, acting at the level of the patient, the health care team that is responsible for them, and the health care system that they find themselves in. Important among these is the availability of competitively priced dialysis fluid. A number of key interventions can affect the uptake of PD. These include high-quality patient education around dialysis modality choice, timely and successful catheter placement, satisfactory patient training, and continued support that is tailored for specific needs, for example, when people present late requiring dialysis. Several health system changes have been shown to increase PD use, such as targeted funding, PD First initiatives, or physician-inserted PD catheters. This review explores the factors that explain the considerable international variation in the use of PD and presents interventions that can potentially affect them.

Association of incident dialysis modality with mortality: a protocol for systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials and cohort studies

BACKGROUND

At least 2.6 million adults and children receive dialysis treatment for end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) worldwide. The large majority of these receive hemodialysis (HD), while the remaining receive peritoneal dialysis (PD). Peritoneal dialysis may be associated with similar mortality outcomes as HD, and patient-reported outcomes are potentially increased with PD. Existing evidence for the mortality associated with PD was summarized over 20 years ago, and there has been greater marginal improvement in survival with PD relative to HD since that time. It is therefore timely to reexamine the question of differential mortality by modality and summarize evidence from more contemporary practice settings.

METHODS/DESIGN

Electronic databases will be systematically searched for publications that report the association between dialysis modality (HD or PD) with death from any cause and cause-specific death in incident patients with end-stage kidney disease. The database searches will be supplemented by searching through citations and references and consultation with experts. Studies published before 1995 will be excluded. Screening of both titles and abstracts will be done by two independent reviewers. All disagreements will be resolved by an independent third reviewer. A quantitative meta-analysis of effect sizes and standard errors will be applied.

DISCUSSION

Our systematic review will update previous evidence summaries and provide a quantitative and standardized assessment of the contemporary literature comparing HD and PD including published and unpublished non-English studies from greater China, Taiwan, and Japan. This review will inform shared decision-making around initial dialysis modality choice and jurisdiction-level considerations of dialysis practice.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42018111829.

Cost-Utility Analysis Using EQ-5D-5L Data: Does How the Utilities Are Derived Matter?

OBJECTIVES

To explore how the use of EQ-5D-5L value set and crosswalk from EQ-5D-5L to EQ-5D-3L (and use of 3L value set) would affect cost-effectiveness analysis results for England and six other countries (Canada, the Netherlands, China, Japan, South Korea, and Singapore).

METHODS

Individual-level utilities derived from primary 5L data using both value set (5L) and crosswalk (c5L) approaches were applied to three Markov models assessing the cost-effectiveness of hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients to estimate incremental quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). The mathematic functions between incremental QALY and utility were derived.

RESULTS

5L- and c5L-based incremental QALYs were similar in the model for non-diabetic patients (range: 1.910-2.149, 1.922-2.121). 5L tends to generate more incremental QALYs than c5L in the model for diabetic patients (range: 1.454-1.633, 1.365-1.568) but fewer incremental QALYs in the model for all ESRD patients (range: 0.290-0.480, 0.315-0.493). In all models, 5L (c5L) generated more incremental QALYs when Chinese (South Korean) value sets were used. The largest and smallest differences in 5L- and c5L-based incremental QALYs were observed when Chinese and Dutch value sets were used. Incremental QALYs was a positive linear function of both utility of PD and difference in utilities of HD and PD.

CONCLUSIONS

The value set and crosswalk approaches may not be used interchangeably in economic evaluation when EQ-5D-5L data are used to estimate utilities. Results of cost-effectiveness analysis using Markov models may be affected by both absolute utilities and their differences.