Time savings of weekly versus three-times-per-week administration of erythropoiesis stimulating agents in United States dialysis patients

OBJECTIVE

Previous research suggests that erythropoiesis stimulating agent (ESA) administration in dialysis is a time-consuming task and switching to less frequently dosed ESAs may offer operational efficiencies. Our objective was to describe and measure the time spent on tasks in the ESA administration process in US dialysis centers, and to estimate potential efficiency gains of using weekly (QW) administration vs three-times-per-week (TIW) administration.

METHODS

We conducted a time and motion study of staff time required to prepare, administer and document ESA doses. Dialysis centers using intravenous administration of TIW epoetin alfa (EPO) or QW darbepoetin alfa (DPO) were selected in pairs (one EPO, one DPO) from the same organization to help control for differences in ESA protocols and staffing patterns across organizations. ESA-related tasks were timed by trained observers. Time savings of TIW vs QW administration were estimated. Staff were interviewed about alternate activities that could be accomplished if time were saved in the ESA process.

RESULTS

A total of 200 administrations were observed (81 DPO, 119 EPO). A mean of 2.26 (95% CI: 2.1-2.5) minutes per dose were required for ESA administration. ESA process time per administration did not vary significantly between EPO and DPO (p = 0.83). Estimated potential monthly staff time savings for an average facility of 70 patients totaled 23 hours, due to fewer ESA administrations using QW DPO. Patient education and fulfillment of care plans were identified as opportunities for improved care processes that could be implemented if staff time was freed up from the ESA process.

LIMITATIONS

Results should not be generalized to other countries, ESAs and/or dosing frequencies.

CONCLUSIONS

Switching from TIW EPO to QW DPO can result in time savings due to fewer administrations and provide opportunities to redirect nurse time towards activities aimed at improving patient care.

High Costs of Dialysis Transportation in the United States: Exploring Approaches to a More Cost-effective Delivery System

Background: The costs of transporting end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients to dialysis centers are high and growing rapidly. Research has suggested that substantial cost savings could be achieved if medically appropriate transport was made available and covered by Medicare. Objectives: To estimate US dialysis transportation costs from a purchaser's perspective, and to estimate cost savings that could be achieved if less expensive means of transport were utilized. Methods: Costs were estimated using an actuarial model. Travel distance estimates were calculated using GIS software from patient ZIP codes and dialysis facility addresses. Cost and utilization estimates were derived from fee schedules, government reports, transportation websites and peer-reviewed literature. Results: The estimated annual cost of dialysis transportation in the United States is $3.0 billion, half of which is for ambulances. Most other costs are due to transport via ambulettes, wheelchair vans and taxis. Approximately 5% of costs incurred are for private vehicle or public transportation use. If ambulance use dropped to 1% of trips from the current 5%, costs could be reduced by one-third. Conclusions: Decision-makers should consider policies to reduce ambulance use, while providing appropriate levels of care.