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.

Health related quality of life of dialysis patients in Malaysia: Haemodialysis versus continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis.

BACKGROUND: Health related quality of life (HRQOL) is an important predictor of clinical outcomes for End Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) patients and to establish quality adjusted life years (QALYs) for economic evaluation studies. This study aims to measure the health utilities and to identify socio-demographic and clinical factors associated with HRQOL for haemodialysis (HD) and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) in Malaysia. METHODS: A total of 141 patients (77 HD and 64 CAPD) from 1 federal and four state hospitals participated in this cross-sectional study. Patients were randomly selected from the National Renal Registry (NRR) using a stratified random sampling. The EQ-5D-3 L questionnaire was used to measure HRQOL. Variables investigated include dialysis modalities, sociodemographic characteristics, co-morbidities and biochemical markers. Utilities are measured on an ordinal scale of 0-1, where 1 indicates full health and 0 indicates death. RESULTS: The mean utility scores were 0.854 ± 0.181 and 0.905 ± 0.124 (p > 0.05) and the mean Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) scores were 76.2 ± 12.90 and 77.1 ± 10.26 (p > 0.05) for HD and CAPD patients respectively. There was a significant difference in problems reported between HD (35.1%) and CAPD (15.6%) on usual activities dimension (p = 0.009). The proportion of patients having problems in the pain/discomfort domain in both modalities was high (34.0%). Haemoglobin (< 10 g/dL) (p = 0.003), number of co-morbidities ≥3 (p = 0.004) and wheelchair-bound status (p < 0.001) were significant predictors of poor HRQOL. CONCLUSIONS: The present cross-sectional study shows that CAPD patients have a higher utility index score than HD patients but this was not statistically significant. The utilities index score may be used to calculate QALYs.

Acute Kidney Injury Risk Assessment: Differences and Similarities Between Resource-Limited and Resource-Rich Countries.

The incidence of acute kidney injury (AKI) among acutely ill patients is reportedly very high and has vexing consequences on patient outcomes and health care systems. The risks and impact of AKI differ between developed and developing countries. Among developing countries, AKI occurs in young individuals with no or limited comorbidities, and is usually due to environmental causes, including infectious diseases. Although several risk factors have been identified for AKI in different settings, there is limited information on how risk assessment can be used at population and patient levels to improve care in patients with AKI, particularly in developing countries where significant health disparities may exist. The Acute Disease Quality Initiative consensus conference work group addressed the issue of identifying risk factors for AKI and provided recommendations for developing individualized risk stratification strategies to improve care. We proposed a 5-dimension, evidence-based categorization of AKI risk that allows clinicians and investigators to study, define, and implement individualized risk assessment tools for the region or country where they practice. These dimensions include environmental, socioeconomic and cultural factors, processes of care, exposures, and the inherent risks of AKI. We provide examples of these risks and describe approaches for risk assessments in the developing world. We anticipate that these recommendations will be useful for health care providers to plan and execute interventions to limit the impact of AKI on society and each individual patient. Using a modified Delphi process, this group reached consensus regarding several aspects of AKI risk stratification.

Increased utilization of peritoneal dialysis to cope with mounting demand for renal replacement therapy--perspectives from Asian countries.

With the number of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients growing, one of the crucial questions facing health care professionals and funding agencies in Asia is whether funding for dialysis will be sufficient to keep up with demand. During the ISPD's 2006 Congress, academic nephrologists and government officials from China, Hong Kong, India, Indonesia, Japan, Macau, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, Taiwan, Thailand, and Vietnam participated in a roundtable discussion on dialysis economics in Asia. The focus was policy and health care financing. The roundtable addressed ESRD growth in Asia and how to obtain enough funding to keep up with the growth in patient numbers. Various models were presented: the "peritoneal dialysis (PD) first" policy model, incentive programs, nongovernmental organizations providing PD, and PD reimbursement in a developing economy. This article summarizes the views of the participant nephrologists on how to increase the utilization of PD to improve on clinical and financial management of patients with ESRD.

Economic evaluation of centre haemodialysis and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis in Ministry of Health hospitals, Malaysia.

BACKGROUND: This is a multi-centre study to determine cost efficiency and cost effectiveness of the Ministry of Health centre haemodialysis and continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) programme. METHODS: Forty-four haemodialysis and 11 CAPD centres were enrolled in this study in 2001. Sixty patients, 30 from each modality, were evaluated. Micro-costing was used to determine costs. RESULTS: The number of haemodialyses conducted ranged from 402 to 23,000 procedures per year, while for CAPD, output ranged from 70 to 2300 patient months/year. Cost ranged from RM79.61 to RM475.79 per haemodialysis treatment, with a mean cost of RM169 per HD (USD 1 = RM 3.80). The cost of CAPD treatment ranged from RM1400 to RM3200 per patient month, with a mean of RM2186. Both modalities incurred similar outpatient costs. The cost of erythropoeitin per year is RM4500 and RM2500 for haemodialysis and CAPD, respectively. The number of life years saved is 10.96 years for haemodialysis and 5.21 years for CAPD. Cost per life year saved is RM33 642 for haemodialysis and RM31 635 for CAPD. The cost for land, building, equipment, overheads, and staff were higher for haemodialysis, while consumables and hospitalization cost more for CAPD. Sensitivity analysis was performed for two discount rates (3 and 5%), varying erythropoietin doses and maximum and minimum overheads. Relative cost effectiveness of haemodialysis and CAPD was unchanged in all sensitivity scenarios, except for overhead costs, which influenced the cost effectiveness of HD. CONCLUSION: It is economically viable to promote the use of both CAPD and haemodialysis because the cost effectiveness of both are nearly equal.