Home Dialysis Is Associated with Lower Costs and Better Survival than Other Modalities: A Population-Based Study in Ontario, Canada

A retrospective clinical and economic analysis of an assisted automated peritoneal dialysis programme in Western Australia

BACKGROUND

Assisted peritoneal dialysis (aPD) represents an alternative kidney replacement therapy for dialysis-dependent patients whose only other options are prolonged hospitalisations or transfer to in-centre haemodialysis (HD). Most programmes have not examined the role of temporary aPD, and there is limited data surrounding the economic implications of temporary aPD programmes. The main aim of this study was to describe the cost-effectiveness of an assisted automated peritoneal dialysis (aAPD) programme, for patients whose only reason to stay in hospital was the temporary inability to independently perform PD at home.

METHODS

Retrospective, single-centre analysis of 45 referrals for aAPD from November 2015 to May 2021. Two groups of patients were enrolled in the study: respite patients already established on PD (to facilitate discharge or prevent admission) and new patients who were not yet trained (to facilitate discharge). To calculate the cost differential, patients were allocated to either staying in hospital or transferring to centre-based HD with comparison to costs on aAPD. Costs were calculated using a healthcare system perspective over the duration of aAPD assistance. Clinical outcomes including peritonitis rate, hospitalisation and mortality were also assessed.

RESULTS

Overall, 1349 episodes of aAPD care were delivered. One thousand forty-two episodes (77%) were for respite patients and 307 episodes (23%) were for new patients awaiting training. The mean duration of assistance was 18 days for pretraining patients and 37 days for respite patients. Overall, the mean length of stay on the programme was 30 days with a range of 1-263 days (SD 43) and 73% of patients graduated to self-care PD. The cost of the aAPD programme was $242 per visit, with an average cost $7260 per patient-episode. The aAPD programme was significantly cheaper than the alternatives, with average hospitalization costs $46,170 per episode, and in-centre HD costs of $9667. $1.497 million was saved over the course of the study. Eleven hospitalisations occurred and the peritonitis rate was 0.8 episodes per patient-year. Two patients died while on aAPD.

CONCLUSION

This study provides the first detailed description of an aAPD respite programme in Australia. We conclude that the implementation of a temporary aAPD programme could lead to a significant reduction in healthcare costs, however peritonitis rates were high.

Home versus in-centre haemodialysis for people with kidney failure

BACKGROUND

Home haemodialysis (HHD) may be associated with important clinical, social or economic benefits. However, few randomised controlled trials (RCTs) have evaluated HHD versus in-centre HD (ICHD). The relative benefits and harms of these two HD modalities are uncertain. This is an update of a review first published in 2014. This update includes non-randomised studies of interventions (NRSIs).

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of HHD versus ICHD in adults with kidney failure.

SEARCH METHODS

We contacted the Information Specialist and searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 9 October 2022 using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (ICTRP) Search Portal, and ClinicalTrials.gov. We searched MEDLINE (OVID) and EMBASE (OVID) for NRSIs.

SELECTION CRITERIA

RCTs and NRSIs evaluating HHD (including community houses and self-care) compared to ICHD in adults with kidney failure were eligible. The outcomes of interest were cardiovascular death, all-cause death, non-fatal myocardial infarction, non-fatal stroke, all-cause hospitalisation, vascular access interventions, central venous catheter insertion/exchange, vascular access infection, parathyroidectomy, wait-listing for a kidney transplant, receipt of a kidney transplant, quality of life (QoL), symptoms related to dialysis therapy, fatigue, recovery time, cost-effectiveness, blood pressure, and left ventricular mass.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently assessed if the studies were eligible and then extracted data. The risk of bias was assessed, and relevant outcomes were extracted. Summary estimates of effect were obtained using a random-effects model, and results were expressed as risk ratios (RR) and their 95% confidence intervals (CI) for dichotomous outcomes and mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% CI for continuous outcomes. Confidence in the evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) approach. Meta-analysis was performed on outcomes where there was sufficient data.

MAIN RESULTS

From the 1305 records identified, a single cross-over RCT and 39 NRSIs proved eligible for inclusion. These studies were of varying design (prospective cohort, retrospective cohort, cross-sectional) and involved a widely variable number of participants (small single-centre studies to international registry analyses). Studies also varied in the treatment prescription and delivery (e.g. treatment duration, frequency, dialysis machine parameters) and participant characteristics (e.g. time on dialysis). Studies often did not describe these parameters in detail. Although the risk of bias, as assessed by the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale, was generally low for most studies, within the constraints of observational study design, studies were at risk of selection bias and residual confounding. Many study outcomes were reported in ways that did not allow direct comparison or meta-analysis. It is uncertain whether HHD, compared to ICHD, may be associated with a decrease in cardiovascular death (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.07; 2 NRSIs, 30,900 participants; very low certainty evidence) or all-cause death (RR 0.80, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.95; 9 NRSIs, 58,984 patients; very low certainty evidence). It is also uncertain whether HHD may be associated with a decrease in hospitalisation rate (MD -0.50 admissions per patient-year, 95% CI -0.98 to -0.02; 2 NRSIs, 834 participants; very low certainty evidence), compared with ICHD. Compared with ICHD, it is uncertain whether HHD may be associated with receipt of kidney transplantation (RR 1.28, 95% CI 1.01 to 1.63; 6 NRSIs, 10,910 participants; very low certainty evidence) and a shorter recovery time post-dialysis (MD -2.0 hours, 95% CI -2.73 to -1.28; 2 NRSIs, 348 participants; very low certainty evidence). It remains uncertain if HHD may be associated with decreased systolic blood pressure (SBP) (MD -11.71 mm Hg, 95% CI -21.11 to -2.46; 4 NRSIs, 491 participants; very low certainty evidence) and decreased left ventricular mass index (LVMI) (MD -17.74 g/m2, 95% CI -29.60 to -5.89; 2 NRSIs, 130 participants; low certainty evidence). There was insufficient data to evaluate the relative association of HHD and ICHD with fatigue or vascular access outcomes. Patient-reported outcome measures were reported using 18 different measures across 11 studies (QoL: 6 measures; mental health: 3 measures; symptoms: 1 measure; impact and view of health: 6 measures; functional ability: 2 measures). Few studies reported the same measures, which limited the ability to perform meta-analysis or compare outcomes. It is uncertain whether HHD is more cost-effective than ICHD, both in the first (SMD -1.25, 95% CI -2.13 to -0.37; 4 NRSIs, 13,809 participants; very low certainty evidence) and second year of dialysis (SMD -1.47, 95% CI -2.72 to -0.21; 4 NRSIs, 13,809 participants; very low certainty evidence).

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Based on low to very low certainty evidence, HHD, compared with ICHD, has uncertain associations or may be associated with decreased cardiovascular and all-cause death, hospitalisation rate, slower post-dialysis recovery time, and decreased SBP and LVMI. HHD has uncertain cost-effectiveness compared with ICHD in the first and second years of treatment. The majority of studies included in this review were observational and subject to potential selection bias and confounding, especially as patients treated with HHD tended to be younger with fewer comorbidities. Variation from study to study in the choice of outcomes and the way in which they were reported limited the ability to perform meta-analyses. Future research should align outcome measures and metrics with other research in the field in order to allow comparison between studies, establish outcome effects with greater certainty, and avoid research waste.

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.

Social determinants of health and dialysis modality selection in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease: A retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Social determinants of health are non-medical factors that impact health. For patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) progressing to kidney failure, the influence of social determinants of health on dialysis modality selection (haemodialysis vs. peritoneal dialysis (PD)) is incompletely understood.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of 981 consecutive patients with advanced CKD referred to the Ottawa Hospital Multi-Care Kidney Clinic (Canada) who progressed to dialysis from 2010 to 2021. Multivariable logistic regression was used to measure odds ratios (OR) for the associations between social determinants of health (education, employment, marital status and residence) and modality of dialysis initiation.

RESULTS

The mean age and estimated glomerular filtration rate were 64 and 18 mL/min/1.73 m2, respectively. Not having a high school degree was associated with lower odds of initiating dialysis via PD compared to having a college degree (29% vs. 48%, OR 0.55 (95% confidence interval (CI) 0.34-0.88)). Unemployment was associated with lower odds of initiating dialysis via PD compared to active employment (38% vs. 62%, OR 0.40 (95% CI 0.27-0.60)). Being single was associated with lower odds of initiating dialysis via PD compared to being married (35% vs. 48%, adjusted OR 0.52 (95% CI 0.39-0.70)). Living alone at home was associated with lower odds of initiating dialysis via PD compared to living at home with family (33% vs. 47%, adjusted OR 0.55 (95% CI 0.39-0.78)).

CONCLUSIONS

Social determinants of health including education, employment, marital status and residence are associated with dialysis modality selection. Addressing these 'upstream' social factors may allow for more equitable outcomes during the transition from advanced CKD to kidney failure.

Patient Survival With Extended Home Hemodialysis Compared to In-Center Conventional Hemodialysis

Introduction

More frequent and/or longer hemodialysis (HD) has been associated with improvements in numerous clinical outcomes in patients on dialysis. Home HD (HHD), which allows more frequent and/or longer dialysis with lower cost and flexibility in treatment planning, is not widely used worldwide. Although, retrospective studies have indicated better survival with HHD, this issue remains controversial. In this multicenter study, we compared thrice-weekly extended HHD with in-center conventional HD (ICHD) in a large patient population with a long-term follow-up.

Methods

We matched 349 patients starting HHD between 2010 and 2014 with 1047 concurrent patients on ICHD by using propensity scores. Patients were followed-up with from their respective baseline until September 30, 2018. The primary outcome was overall survival. Secondary outcomes were technique survival; hospitalization; and changes in clinical, laboratory, and medication parameters.

Results

The mean duration of dialysis session was 418 ± 54 minutes in HHD and 242 ± 10 minutes in patients on ICHD. All-cause mortality rate was 3.76 and 6.27 per 100 patient-years in the HHD and the ICHD groups, respectively. In the intention-to-treat analysis, HHD was associated with a 40% lower risk for all-cause mortality than ICHD (hazard ratio [HR] = 0.60; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.45 to 0.80; P < 0.001). In HHD, the 5-year technical survival was 86.5%. HHD treatment provided better phosphate and blood pressure (BP) control, improvements in nutrition and inflammation, and reduction in hospitalization days and medication requirement.

Conclusion

These results indicate that extended HHD is associated with higher survival and better outcomes compared to ICHD.

Factors affecting access to dialysis for patients with end-stage kidney disease in Sub-Saharan Africa: A scoping review

AIMS

This scoping review examined the factors affecting access to dialysis for patients with end-stage kidney disease in Sub-Saharan Africa.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

METHODS

The scoping review is conducted following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology for scoping reviews and modelled by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses extension for scoping review.

RESULTS

A descriptive content analysis of 30 included articles revealed three main findings affecting access and use of dialysis: Health system-related factors, health provider-related factors and patient factors.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Equity in renal replacement therapy access and use will require concerted advocacy for good public policy, healthcare delivery, workforce capacity and education.

Home dialysis: conclusions from a Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) Controversies Conference

Home dialysis modalities (home hemodialysis [HD] and peritoneal dialysis [PD]) are associated with greater patient autonomy and treatment satisfaction compared with in-center modalities, yet the level of home-dialysis use worldwide is low. Reasons for limited utilization are context-dependent, informed by local resources, dialysis costs, access to healthcare, health system policies, provider bias or preferences, cultural beliefs, individual lifestyle concerns, potential care-partner time, and financial burdens. In May 2021, KDIGO (Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes) convened a controversies conference on home dialysis, focusing on how modality choice and distribution are determined and strategies to expand home-dialysis use. Participants recognized that expanding use of home dialysis within a given health system requires alignment of policy, fiscal resources, organizational structure, provider incentives, and accountability. Clinical outcomes across all dialysis modalities are largely similar, but for specific clinical measures, one modality may have advantages over another. Therefore, choice among available modalities is preference-sensitive, with consideration of quality of life, life goals, clinical characteristics, family or care-partner support, and living environment. Ideally, individuals, their care-partners, and their healthcare teams will employ shared decision-making in assessing initial and subsequent kidney failure treatment options. To meet this goal, iterative, high-quality education and support for healthcare professionals, patients, and care-partners are priorities. Everyone who faces dialysis should have access to home therapy. Facilitating universal access to home dialysis and expanding utilization requires alignment of policy considerations and resources at the dialysis-center level, with clear leadership from informed and motivated clinical teams.

Comorbidity and nutritional status in adult with advanced chronic kidney disease influence the decision-making choice of renal replacement therapy modality: A retrospective 5-year study

Background

Nutritional and inflammation status are significant predictors of morbidity and mortality risk in advanced chronic kidney disease (ACKD). To date, there are a limited number of clinical studies on the influence of nutritional status in ACKD stages 4-5 on the choice of renal replacement therapy (RRT) modality.

Aim

This study aimed to examine relationships between comorbidity and nutritional and inflammatory status and the decision-making on the choice of RRT modalities in adults with ACKD.

Methods

A retrospective cross-sectional study was conducted on 211 patients with ACKD with stages 4-5 from 2016 to 2021. Comorbidity was assessed using the Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) according to severity (CCI: ≤ 3 and >3 points). Clinical and nutritional assessment was carried out by prognosis nutritional index (PNI), laboratory parameters [serum s-albumin, s-prealbumin, and C-reactive protein (s-CRP)], and anthropometric measurements. The initial decision-making of the different RRT modalities [(in-center, home-based hemodialysis (HD), and peritoneal dialysis (PD)] as well as the informed therapeutic options (conservative treatment of CKD or pre-dialysis living donor transplantation) were recorded. The sample was classified according to gender, time on follow-up in the ACKD unit (≤ 6 and >6 months), and the initial decision-making of RRT (in-center and home-RRT). Univariate and multivariate regression analyses were carried out for evaluating the independent predictors of home-based RRT.

Results

Of the 211 patients with ACKD, 47.4% (n = 100) were in stage 5 CKD, mainly elderly men (65.4%). DM was the main etiology of CKD (22.7%) together with hypertension (96.6%) as a CV risk factor. Higher CCI scores were significantly found in men, and severe comorbidity with a CCI score > 3 points was 99.1%. The mean time of follow-up time in the ACKD unit was 9.6 ± 12.8 months. A significantly higher CCI was found in those patients with a follow-up time > 6 months, as well as higher mean values of eGFR, s-albumin, s-prealbumin, s-transferrin, and hemoglobin, and lower s-CRP than those with a follow-up <6 months (all, at least p < 0.05). The mean PNI score was 38.9 ± 5.5 points, and a PNI score ≤ 39 points was found in 36.5%. S-albumin level > 3.8 g/dl was found in 71.1% (n = 150), and values of s-CRP ≤ 1 mg/dl were 82.9% (n = 175). PEW prevalence was 15.2%. The initial choice of RRT modality was higher in in-center HD (n = 119 patients; 56.4%) than in home-based RRT (n = 81; 40.5%). Patients who chose home-based RRT had significantly lower CCI scores and higher mean values of s-albumin, s-prealbumin, s-transferrin, hemoglobin, and eGFR and lower s-CRP than those who chose in-center RRT (p < 0.001). Logistic regression demonstrated that s-albumin (OR: 0.147) and a follow-up time in the ACKD unit >6 months (OR: 0.440) were significantly associated with the likelihood of decision-making to choose a home-based RRT modality (all, at least p < 0.05).

Conclusion

Regular monitoring and follow-up of sociodemographic factors, comorbidity, and nutritional and inflammatory status in a multidisciplinary ACKD unit significantly influenced decision-making on the choice of RRT modality and outcome in patients with non-dialysis ACKD.

Transitions between dialysis modalities

Thanks to the progress of dialysis, survival of patients with end-stage renal disease is increasing. For those patients who cannot benefit from a kidney transplantation, several dialysis alternatives exist, but the transition between dialysis techniques may be difficult. Home dialysis offers many advantages but requires personal commitment from the patients and the caregivers. How can we ensure smooth transitioning to the best dialysis technique at the right time for the right person? One of the main caveats of peritoneal dialysis is its limited technique survival, however, it combines the advantages of preserving residual kidney function, avoiding the need for a vascular access, or preserving it, when present, while providing good cost-effectiveness. On the other hand, home hemodialysis has excellent long-term technique survival. The home integrated model of peritoneal dialysis followed by home hemodialysis has been described as the ideal pathway of care. Eventually, in-center hemodialysis can be provided according to several schedules to adapt to the needs of the patients. The issue of technique survival and the possible need to switch to another technique should be part of the initial discussion, when the patient needs to choose the first dialysis modality. Unplanned transfers are associated with poor outcomes and unwanted shifts to in-center hemodialysis. Therefore, transfers from home-based techniques should be anticipated as much as possible in order to establish a shared decision modality process and to choose the desired new modality. Dialysis units dedicated to "transition care" should answer the needs of patients and smooth the transition process between dialysis modalities.

Main Barriers to the Introduction of a Home Haemodialysis Programme in Poland: A Review of the Challenges for Implementation and Criteria for a Successful Programme

Introduction: Home dialysis in Poland is restricted to the peritoneal dialysis (PD) modality, with the majority of dialysis patients treated using in-centre haemodialysis (ICHD). Home haemodialysis (HHD) is an additional home therapy to PD and provides an attractive alternative to ICHD that combines dialysis with social distancing; eliminates transportation needs; and offers clinical, economic, and quality of life benefits. However, HHD is not currently provided in Poland. This review was performed to provide an overview of the main barriers to the introduction of a HHD programme in Poland. Main findings: The main high-level barrier to introducing HHD in Poland is the absence of specific health legislation required for clinician prescribing of HHD. Other barriers to overcome include clear definition of reimbursement, patient training and education (including infrastructure and experienced personnel), organisation of logistics, and management of complications. Partnering with a large care network for HHD represents an alternative option to payers for the provision of a new HHD service. This may reduce some of the barriers which need to be overcome when compared with the creation of a new HHD service and its supporting network due to the pre-existing infrastructure, processes, and staff of a large care network. Conclusions: Provision of HHD is not solely about the provision of home treatment, but also the organisation and definition of a range of support services that are required to deliver the service. HHD should be viewed as an additional, complementary option to existing dialysis modalities which enables choice of modality best suited to a patient’s needs.

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).

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.

Results of the European EDITH nephrologist survey on factors influencing treatment modality choice for end-stage kidney disease

BACKGROUND

Access to forms of dialysis, kidney transplantation (Tx) and comprehensive conservative management (CCM) for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) varies across European countries. Attitudes of nephrologists, information provision and decision-making may influence this access and nephrologists may experience several barriers when providing treatments for ESKD.

METHODS

We surveyed European nephrologists and kidney transplant surgeons treating adults with ESKD about factors influencing modality choice. Descriptive statistics were used to compare the opinions of professionals from European countries with low-, middle- and high-gross domestic product purchasing power parity (GDP PPP).

RESULTS

In total, 681 professionals from 33 European countries participated. Respondents from all GDP categories indicated that ∼10% of patients received no information before the start of renal replacement therapy (RRT) (P = 0.106). Early information provision and more involvement of patients in decision-making were more frequently reported in middle- and high-GDP countries (P < 0.05). Professionals' attitudes towards several treatments became more positive with increasing GDP (P < 0.05). Uptake of in-centre haemodialysis was sufficient to 73% of respondents, but many wanted increased uptake of home dialysis, Tx and CCM. Respondents experienced different barriers according to availability of specific treatments in their centre. The occurrence of barriers (financial, staff shortage, lack of space/supplies and patient related) decreased with increasing GDP (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Differences in factors influencing modality choice when providing RRT or CCM to adults with ESKD were found among low-, middle- and high-GDP countries in Europe. Therefore a unique pan-European policy to improve access to treatments may be inefficient. Different policies for clusters of countries could be more useful.

Cost-Effectiveness of Home Hemodialysis With Bedside Portable Dialysis Machine "DIMI" in the United Arab Emirates

Background and objective

The incidence and prevalence of patients requiring renal replacement therapies (RRTs) are increasing worldwide and a large number of these patients die prematurely due to the unavailability of treatment. While in-center hemodialysis remains the most commonly practiced modality globally, more and more patients find it unsuitable due to their frail condition, difficulty in ambulation, and time lost in traveling, etc. Such patients find the self-administered or nurse-assisted home hemodialysis (NAHHD) more suitable. The costly and recurring nature of these therapies prompted us to evaluate and compare the cost-effectiveness aspect of these two treatment modalities. Thus, the aim of the study was to investigate if home hemodialysis (HHD) with a portable hemodialysis machine was cost-effective in comparison to in-center hemodialysis for patients of end-stage renal failure (ESRF) in the United Arab Emirates (UAE). This is the first study of its kind to be conducted in the UAE.

Methodology

The study topic was developed based on an informal inquiry from the health regulator of Abu Dhabi if HHD was cost-effective compared to in-center hemodialysis with an emphasis on a portable dialysis machine. No such head-to-head study performed in the UAE was available. Hence, a systematic review based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) design was chosen as the investigative method. An outline of the study was drafted, and a literature search of Science of Web, PubMed, and Cochrane Evidence was performed using the keywords "Home Hemodialysis", "home-based Dialysis", "Cost-effectiveness of Dialysis", "Cost-effectiveness of renal replacement therapy", etc. A review of the article titles was performed to include the articles relevant to the cost of RRTs and the economic burden of ESRF. Full text and abstracts of those articles were retrieved, studied, and, the articles that were found not relevant were excluded. The remaining articles were studied and used in the evidence synthesis. DIMI was chosen to represent a standard type of recently developed portable dialysis machines.

Results

It was interesting to find out during the review that HHD and in-center hemodialysis had been developed simultaneously but the former had eventually fallen out of favor. The review revealed that HHD is not only as effective as in-center hemodialysis but is also associated with better survival benefits over the latter. Several studies have found it to be significantly cost-effective compared to in-center hemodialysis. Newer types of HHD machines make it easier for the patients or their family/caregivers to administer it safely and effectively at home and while traveling. They have regenerated interest in HHD and the Medicare administration in the USA has already decided to make use of it at a more frequent rate.

Conclusion

Based on the evidence in the available literature, HHD is cost-effective when compared to in-center hemodialysis in terms of survival benefits, quality of life (QoL) of patients, and monetary savings. Newer portable bedside dialysis machines provide better safety and have simplified the procedure of hemodialysis, making HHD more acceptable to patients and caregivers. We believe HHD should be the preferred modality of treatment instead of in-center hemodialysis, and that applies to UAE too.

Challenging Assumptions of Outcomes and Costs Comparing Peritoneal and Hemodialysis

OBJECTIVES

Policy makers have suggested increasing peritoneal dialysis (PD) would improve end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) outcomes and reduce Medicare spending compared with hemodialysis (HD). We compared mortality, hospitalizations, and Medicare spending between PD and HD among uninsured adults with incident ESKD.

METHODS

Using an instrumental variable design, we exploited a natural experiment encouraging PD among the uninsured. Uninsured patients usually receive Medicare at dialysis month 4. For those initiating PD, Medicare covers the first 3 dialysis months, including predialysis services in the calendar month when dialysis started. Starting dialysis later in a calendar month increases predialysis coverage that is essential for PD catheter placements. The policy encourages PD incrementally when ESKD develops later in the month. Dialysis start day appears to be unrelated to patient characteristics and effectively "randomizes patients" to dialysis modality, mitigating selection bias.

RESULTS

Starting dialysis later in the month was associated with an increased PD uptake: every week later in the month was associated with an absolute increase of 0.8% (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.6%-0.9%) at dialysis day 1 and 0.5% (95% CI 0.3%-0.7%) at dialysis month 12. We observed no significant absolute difference between PD and HD for 12-month mortality (-0.9%, 95% CI -3.3% to 0.8%), hospitalizations during months 7 to 12 (-0.05, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.07), and Medicare spending during months 7 to 12 (-$702, 95% CI -$4004 to $2909).

CONCLUSIONS

In an instrumental variable analysis, PD did not result in improved outcomes or lower costs than HD.

Commentary on the NICE guideline on renal replacement therapy and conservative management

NICE Guideline NG107, “Renal replacement therapy and conservative management” (Renal replacement therapy and conservative management (NG107); 2018:1–33) was published in October 2018 and replaced the existing NICE guideline CG125, “Chronic Kidney Disease (Stage 5): peritoneal dialysis” (Chronic kidney disease (stage 5): peritoneal dialysis | Guidance | NICE; 2011) and NICE Technology Appraisal TA48, “Guidance on home compared with hospital haemodialysis for patients with end-stage renal failure”(Guidance on home compared with hospital haemodialysis for patients with end-stage renal failure (Technology appraisal guideline TA48); 2002) The aim of the NICE guideline (NG107) was to provide guidance on renal replacement therapy (RRT), including dialysis, transplant and conservative care, for adults and children with CKD Stages 4 and 5. The guideline is extremely welcomed by the Renal Association and it offers huge value to patients, clinicians, commissioners and key stakeholders. It overlaps and enhances current guidance published by the Renal Association including “Haemodialysis” (Clinical practice guideline: Haemodialysis; 2019) which was updated in 2019 after the publication of the NICE guideline, “Peritoneal Dialysis in Adults and Children” (Clinical practice guideline: peritoneal Dialysis in adults and children; 2017) and “Planning, Initiation & withdrawal of Renal Replacement Therapy” (Clinical practice guideline: planning, initiation and withdrawal of renal replacement therapy; 2014) (at present there are no plans to update this guideline).

There are several strengths to NICE guideline NG107 and we agree with and support the vast majority of recommendation statements in the guideline. This summary from the Renal Association discusses some of the key highlights, controversies, gaps in knowledge and challenges in implementation. Where there is disagreement with a NICE guideline statement, we have highlighted this and a new suggested statement has been written.

Perceptions of Multidisciplinary Renal Team Members toward Home Dialysis Therapies

Background

Patients with ESKD are encouraged to pursue home dialysis therapy with the aims of improving quality of life, increasing patient autonomy, and reducing cost to health care systems. In a multidisciplinary team setting, patients interact with nephrologists, nurses, and allied health staff, all of whom may influence a patient's modality choice. Our objective was to evaluate the perceptions of all renal team members toward home dialysis therapies.

Methods

We performed a cross-sectional survey of multidisciplinary renal team members across five renal programs in British Columbia, Canada. The survey contained questions regarding primary work area, modality preference, patient and system factors that may influence modality candidacy, perceived knowledge of home therapies, and need for further education.

Results

A total of 334 respondents (22 nephrologists, 172 hemodialysis nurses, 49 home nurses, 20 predialysis nurses, and 71 allied health staff) were included (48% response rate). All respondents felt that home dialysis was beneficial for patients who work or study, improved patients' quality of life, and provided cost savings to the system. Compared with in-center hemodialysis nurses, home therapies nurses were between five and nine times more likely to favor a home therapy for patients of older age, lower socioeconomic status, lower educational level, higher burden of comorbidities, and those lacking social supports. Nephrologists and patients were felt to have the most influence on modality choice, whereas dialysis nurses were seen as having the least effect on modality choice. Most respondents felt the need for further education in home therapies.

Conclusions

The majority of multidisciplinary team members, including allied health staff, acknowledged the benefits of home therapies. There were significant discrepancies among team members regarding patient-/system-level factors that may affect the candidacy of home therapies. Structured, focused, and repeated education sessions for all renal team members may help to address misperceptions around factors that influence modality candidacy.

Growing home dialysis: The Ontario Renal Network Home Dialysis Initiative 2012-2019

The Ontario Renal Network (ORN), a provincial government agency in Ontario, Canada, launched an initiative in 2012 to increase home dialysis use province-wide. The initiative included a new modality-based funding formula, a standard mandatory informatics system, targets for prevalent home dialysis rates, the development of a 'network' of renal programmes with commitment to home dialysis and a culture of accountability with frequent meetings between ORN and each renal programme leadership to review their results. It also included funding of home dialysis coordinators, encouragement and funding of assisted peritoneal dialysis (PD), and support for catheter insertion and urgent start PD. Between 2012 and 2017, home dialysis use rose from 21.9% to 26.5% and then between 2017 and 2019 stabilised at 26% to 26.5%. Over 7 years, the absolute number of people on home dialysis increased 40% from 2222 to 3105, while the number on facility haemodialysis grew 11% from 7935 to 8767. PD prevalence rose from 16.6% to 20.9%, a relative increase of 25%. The initiative showed that a sustained multifaceted approach can increase home dialysis utilisation.

International Society of Nephrology Global Kidney Health Atlas: structures, organization, and services for the management of kidney failure in North America and the Caribbean

The International Society of Nephrology established the Global Kidney Health Atlas project to define the global capacity for kidney replacement therapy and conservative kidney care, and this second iteration was to describe the availability, accessibility, quality, and affordability of kidney failure (KF) care worldwide. This report presents results for the International Society of Nephrology North America and the Caribbean region. Relative to other regions, the North America and Caribbean region had better infrastructure and funding for health care and more health care workers relative to the population. Various essential medicines were also more available and accessible. There was substantial variation in the prevalence of treated KF in the region, ranging from 137.4 per million population (pmp) in Jamaica to 2196 pmp in the United States. A mix of public and private funding systems cover costs for nondialysis chronic kidney disease care in 60% of countries and for dialysis in 70% of countries. Although the median number of nephrologists is 18.1 (interquartile range, 15.3-29.5) pmp, which is approximately twice the global median of 9.9 (interquartile range, 1.2-22.7) pmp, some countries reported shortages of other health care workers. Dialysis was available in all countries, but peritoneal dialysis was underutilized and unavailable in Barbados, Cayman Islands, and Turks and Caicos. Kidney transplantation was primarily available in Canada and the United States. Economic factors were the major barriers to optimal KF care in the Caribbean countries, and few countries in the region have chronic kidney disease-specific national health care policies. To address regional gaps in KF care delivery, efforts should be directed toward augmenting the workforce, improving the monitoring and reporting of kidney replacement therapy indicators, and implementing noncommunicable disease and chronic kidney disease-specific policies in all countries.

International Society of Nephrology Global Kidney Health Atlas: structures, organization, and services for the management of kidney failure in Western Europe

Populations in the high-income countries of Western Europe are aging due to increased life expectancy. As the prevalence of diabetes and obesity has increased, so has the burden of kidney failure. To determine the global capacity for kidney replacement therapy and conservative kidney management, the International Society of Nephrology conducted multinational, cross-sectional surveys and published the findings in the International Society of Nephrology Global Kidney Health Atlas. In the second iteration of the International Society of Nephrology Global Kidney Health Atlas, we aimed to describe the availability, accessibility, quality, and affordability of kidney failure care in Western Europe. Among the 29 countries in Western Europe, 21 (72.4%) responded, representing 99% of the region's population. The burden of kidney failure prevalence varied widely, ranging from 760 per million population (pmp) in Iceland to 1612 pmp in Portugal. Coverage of kidney replacement therapy from public funding was nearly universal, with the exceptions of Germany and Liechtenstein where part of the costs was covered by mandatory insurance. Fourteen (67%) of 21 countries charged no fees at the point of care delivery, but in 5 countries (24%), patients do pay some out-of-pocket costs. Long-term dialysis services (both hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis) were available in all countries in the region, and kidney transplantation services were available in 19 (90%) countries. The incidence of kidney transplantation varied widely between countries from 12 pmp in Luxembourg to 70.45 pmp in Spain. Conservative kidney care was available in 18 (90%) of 21 countries. The median number of nephrologists was 22.9 pmp (range: 9.47-55.75 pmp). These data highlight the uniform capacity of Western Europe to provide kidney failure care, but also the scope for improvement in disease prevention and management, as exemplified by the variability in disease burden and transplantation rates.

Economic Impact of Home Hemodialysis

Home hemodialysis (HD) is growing in the United States, but the economics of the modality are largely unknown, especially considering the unique aspects of home HD in the United States . In this review, I focus on details of Medicare coverage, which directly applies to most patients on dialysis and influences the policies of private insurers. Key details in Medicare comprise the relationship between home dialysis training and initial Medicare eligibility, reimbursement for home HD training, coverage of additional HD treatments (ie., in excess of 3 treatments per week), and monthly capitated payments to nephrologists. The overarching narrative is that frequent home HD directly increases Medicare costs for outpatient dialysis, but these added costs can be mitigated by lower inpatient expenditures if increased HD treatment frequency lowers the risk of cardiovascular hospitalization and infection control is emphasized. I also review recent international literature; conventional home HD exhibits a superior cost profile, whereas frequent home HD is generally cost-effective over multiple treatment years (ie, if early technique failure is avoided). Out-of-pocket expenses for patients should be considered. The future economics of home HD in the United States will be determined by new equipment, new adaptations of the modality, and new payment models.

Health Outcomes and Cost Considerations of Assisted Peritoneal Dialysis: A Narrative Review

BACKGROUND

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is underutilized in many parts of the world despite pro-PD health policies. The physical and cognitive demands of PD means that over half of eligible patients require some form of assistance. As such, many countries now offer assisted PD (aPD) programs to help patients start or stay on PD as opposed to in-center hemodialysis (HD). In order to evaluate the potential scope of aPD, it is important to review the outcomes and cost considerations of aPD.

SUMMARY

We reviewed available data from different countries and regions for health outcomes between aPD and in-center HD, with a focus on quality of life (QoL), mortality, hospitalization, and technique survival. We also evaluated studies discussing the overall costs of delivering aPD, including training, operating costs, and indirect costs and compared these to in-center HD costs for the same regions. Key Messages: aPD patients are older and more frail than either self-care PD patients and many in-center HD patients. We found no evidence for any difference in QoL, mortality, or hospitalization between aPD and in-center HD after adjustment for these differences. There is some evidence for an association between nurse assistance and improved technique survival as compared to family assistance or self-care PD. Despite increased cost of providing assistance in PD, it is still significantly less expensive than in-center HD in Western Europe and Canada.

Prevalence of peritonitis and mortality in patients with ESKD treated with chronic peritoneal dialysis in Africa: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to report the prevalence of peritonitis and mortality in patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) treated with chronic peritoneal dialysis (PD) in Africa.

DESIGN

Systematic review.

SETTING

Africa.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients with ESKD in Africa.

INTERVENTIONS

PD in its varied forms.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES

PD-related peritonitis rate (primary outcome), time-to-discontinuation of PD, mortality.

DATA SOURCES

Four databases, including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science and Africa Journal Online were systematically searched from 1 January 1980 to 31 December 2019.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies conducted in Africa reporting peritonitis rate and mortality in patients treated with PD.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Two reviewers extracted and synthesised the data using Microsoft Excel. The quality of included data was also assessed.

RESULTS

We included 17 studies from seven African countries representing 1894 patients treated with PD. The overall median age was 41.4 years (IQR: 38.2-44.7) with a median time on PD of 18.0 months (17.0-22.6). An overall median peritonitis rate of 0.75 (0.56-2.20) episodes per patient-year (PPY) was observed and had declined with time; peritonitis rate was higher in paediatric studies than adult studies (1.78 (1.26-2.25) vs 0.63 (0.55-1.87) episodes PPY). The overall median proportion of deaths was 21.1% (16.2-25.8). Culture negative peritonitis was common in paediatric studies and studies that reported combined outcomes of continuous ambulatory PD and automated PD. Both 1-year and 2-year technique survival were low in all studies (83.6% and 53.0%, respectively) and were responsible for a high proportion of modality switch.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study identifies that there is still high but declining peritonitis rates as well as low technique and patient survival in PD studies conducted in Africa. Sustained efforts should continue to mitigate factors associated with peritonitis in patients with ESKD treated with PD in Africa.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017072966.

A Single-Center Retrospective Study on the Initiation of Peritoneal Dialysis in Patients With Cardiorenal Syndrome and Subsequent Hospitalizations

Background:

Inotropic dependence and diuretic resistance in patients with cardiorenal syndrome (CRS) lead to frequent hospitalizations and are associated with high mortality. Starting peritoneal dialysis (PD) acutely (within 2 weeks of a heart failure hospitalization) offers effective volume removal without hemodynamic compromise in this population. There is little data on this approach in the North American literature.

Objective:

To determine whether volume-overloaded patients with CRS on maximal doses of diuretic therapy had reduced hospitalization for heart failure following PD initiation.

Design:

Retrospective cohort study.

Setting:

Academic hospital network (University Health Network, Toronto, Ontario).

Patients:

Patients with CRS receiving a bedside catheter and starting PD within 2 weeks of insertion at the University Health Network from January 1, 2013, to December 31, 2018.

Methods and measurements:

Data for heart failure–related hospitalizations and length of stay 6 months before and after PD initiation were collected. Patients who died, switched to hemodialysis, or were transferred to another facility within 6 months of starting PD were excluded from the analysis.

Results:

We identified 31 patients with CRS who had a bedside PD catheter inserted. The average age of patients was 66.0 ± 13.0 years. There were 7 (22.6%) deaths and 4 (12.9%) transfers to other programs or hemodialysis within 6 months of catheter insertion. After exclusion, we analyzed hospitalization and length of stay data for 20 patients. The hospitalization rate 6 months before PD initiation was 6.9 admissions per 1000 patient-days. This decreased to 2.5 admissions per 1000 patient-days after PD initiation. In addition, there was also a significant reduction in the average length of stay per hospitalization (24.1-3.9 days; P = .001).

Limitations:

Our study did not assess the severity of heart failure symptoms using a standardized functional classification system. We did not assess quality of life and illness intrusiveness scores before and after starting dialysis, nor did we capture non–heart-failure-related hospitalizations or external admissions at other hospital sites. We limited eligibility to clinically stable patients with no prior major abdominal surgical history in a single Canadian PD program using bedside ultrasound approach for catheter insertions by experienced nephrologists and included a small number of patients.

Conclusions:

Volume-overloaded patients with CRS receiving maximal diuretic therapy have lower hospitalization rates and shorter stays after initiation of PD. The development of a bedside PD catheter insertion program and close collaboration between nephrology and cardiology services may facilitate acute start dialysis in this population.

Barriers to optimal peritoneal dialysis

Peritoneal dialysis in the United States is underutilized when compared to the experience in other developed countries. The reasons for this are multifactorial and include government regulatory issues, the priority of dialysis facilities, and education and training of nephrology trainees and patients. The challenges to expanding PD in the United States are discussed and strategies to overcome the barriers are outlined.