Organizational Characteristics Associated with High Performance in Medicare's Comprehensive End-Stage Renal Disease Care Initiative.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Medicare plans to extend financial structures tested through the Comprehensive End-Stage Renal Disease Care (CEC) Initiative-an alternative payment model for maintenance dialysis providers-to promote high-value care for beneficiaries with kidney failure. The End-Stage Renal Disease Seamless Care Organizations (ESCOs) that formed under the CEC Initiative varied greatly in their ability to generate cost savings and improve patient health outcomes. This study examined whether organizational or community characteristics were associated with ESCOs' performance. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We used a retrospective pooled cross-sectional analysis of all 37 ESCOs participating in the CEC Initiative during 2015-2018 (n=87 ESCO-years). Key exposures included ESCO characteristics: number of dialysis facilities, number and types of physicians, and years of CEC Initiative experience. Outcomes of interest included were above versus below median gross financial savings (2.4%) and standardized mortality ratio (0.93). We analyzed unadjusted differences between high- and low-performing ESCOs and then used multivariable logistic regression to construct average marginal effect estimates for parameters of interest. RESULTS: Above-median gross savings were obtained by 23 (52%) ESCOs with no program experience, 14 (32%) organizations with 1 year of experience, and seven (16%) organizations with 2 years of experience. The adjusted likelihoods of achieving above-median gross savings were 23 (95% confidence interval, 8 to 37) and 48 (95% confidence interval, 24 to 68) percentage points higher for ESCOs with 1 or 2 years of program experience, respectively (versus none). The adjusted likelihood of achieving above-median gross savings was 1.7 (95% confidence interval, -3 to -1) percentage points lower with each additional affiliated dialysis facility. Adjusted mortality rates were lower for ESCOs located in areas with higher socioeconomic status. CONCLUSIONS: Smaller ESCOs, organizations with more experience in the CEC Initiative, and those located in more affluent areas performed better under the CEC Initiative.

Cost-effectiveness analysis of immediate access arteriovenous grafts versus standard grafts for hemodialysis.

OBJECTIVE: Immediate-access arteriovenous grafts (IAAVGs), or early cannulation arteriovenous grafts (AVGs), are more expensive than standard grafts (sAVGs) but can be used immediately after placement, reducing the need for a tunneled dialysis catheter (TDC). We hypothesized that a decrease in TDC-related complications would make IAAVGs a cost-effective alternative to sAVGs. METHODS: We constructed a Markov state-transition model in which patients initially received either an IAAVG or an sAVG and a TDC until graft usability; patients were followed through multiple subsequent access procedures for a 60-month time horizon. The model simulated mortality and typical graft- and TDC-related complications, with parameter estimates including probabilities, costs, and utilities derived from previous literature. A key parameter was median time to TDC removal after graft placement, which was studied under both real-world (7 days for IAAVG and 70 days for sAVG) and ideal (no TDC placed with IAAVG and 1 month for sAVG) conditions. Costs were based on current Medicare reimbursement rates and reflect a payer perspective. Both microsimulation (10,000 trials) and probabilistic sensitivity analysis (10,000 samples) were performed. The willingness-to-pay threshold was set at $100,000 per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). RESULTS: IAAVG placement is a dominant strategy under both real-world ($1201.16 less expensive and 0.03 QALY more effective) and ideal ($1457.97 less expensive and 0.03 QALY more effective) conditions. Under real-world parameters, the result was most sensitive to the time to TDC removal; IAAVGs are cost-effective if a TDC is maintained for ≥23 days after sAVG placement. The mean catheter time was lower with IAAVG (3.9 vs 8.7 months; P < .0001), as was the mean number of access-related infections (0.55 vs 0.74; P < .0001). Median survival in the model was 29 months. Overall mortality was similar between groups (76.3% vs 76.7% at 5 years; P = .33), but access-related mortality trended toward improvement with IAAVG (6.1% vs 6.8% at 5 years; P = .052). CONCLUSIONS: The Markov decision analysis model supported our hypothesis that IAAVGs come with added initial cost but are ultimately cost-saving and more effective. This apparent benefit is due to our prediction that a decreased number of catheter days per patient would lead to a decreased number of access-related infections.

Online hemodiafilteration use in children: a single center experience with a twist.

BACKGROUND: Haemodiafilteration (HDF) is a promising new modality of renal replacement therapy (RRT). It is an improvement in the quality of hemodialysis (HD) and thus in the quality of patients'lives. The main obstacle to using HDF is the cost, especially in developing countries. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the benefits of incorporating HDF with different regimens in the treatment of children with end stage renal disease (ESRD). METHODS: Thirty-four children with ESRD on regular HD in Pediatric Dialysis Unit, Children's Hospital, Ain Shams University were followed up in 2 phases: initial phase (all patients: HD thrice weekly for 3 months) and second phase, patients were randomized into 2 groups, HDF group and HD group, the former was subdivided into once and twice weekly HDF subgroups. Evaluation using history, clinical and laboratory parameters at 0, 3, 9 and 18 months was carried out. RESULTS: On short term, we found that the HDF group was significantly superior to HD group regarding all clinical and laboratory parameters. Also, twice HDF subgroup was significantly superior to once HDF subgroup. This was confirmed on long term follow up, but the once HDF proved comparable to twice subgroup. CONCLUSIONS: Incorporating online hemodiafilteration (OL-HDF) in the RRT of children was beneficial in most of the clinical and laboratory parameters measured. It's not all or non; OL-HDF, even once a week, can improve outcomes of HD without significantly affecting the cost.

Comparison between Surgical and Endovascular Hemodialysis Arteriovenous Fistula Interventions and Associated Costs.

PURPOSE: To compare: (i) rate of arteriovenous fistula (AVF) interventions in both incident and prevalent end-stage kidney disease patients; (ii) their associated costs; and (iii) intervention-free survival between patients with surgical hemodialysis arteriovenous fistula (SAVF) versus those with an endovascularly created fistula (endoAVF). MATERIALS AND METHODS: Data from the United States Renal Data System (USRDS) were abstracted to determine the rate of AVF interventions performed in the first year and associated costs (based on Medicare payment rates) for SAVFs created from 2011 to 2013 in the incident and prevalent patient cohorts. Comparative data for endoAVF were obtained from the Novel Endovascular Access Trial (NEAT). Event rates, intervention-free survival, and costs were compared between endoAVF and SAVF cohorts after 1:1 propensity score (PS) matching. RESULTS: In the matched incident patients, the event rate was 0.74 per patient-year (PY) for endoAVF versus 7.22/PY for SAVF (P < .0001), with a difference in expenditures of $16,494. Similarly, in matched prevalent patients the event rate was 0.46/PY for endoAVF vs 4.10/PY for SAVF (P < .0001), resulting in a cost difference of $13,389. Time-to-event analysis showed that at 1 year, 70% of endoAVF patients experienced freedom from intervention versus only 18% of SAVF patients for incident patients; these numbers were 62% and 18% for endoAVF and SAVF prevalent patients, respectively (P < .0001 for both). CONCLUSIONS: Both incident and prevalent patients with endoAVF required fewer interventions and had lower costs within the first year compared with matched patients with SAVF.

A Real-world Cost-effectiveness Analysis of Sevelamer Versus Calcium Acetate in Korean Dialysis Patients.

PURPOSE: Sevelamer, a noncalcium phosphate binder, has been shown to attenuate the progression of vascular calcification and improve survival in patients with chronic kidney disease undergoing dialysis compared with calcium-based binders. Using real-world data from a cohort study and the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service database, we conducted a cost-effectiveness analysis comparing sevelamer with calcium acetate in dialysis patients from the perspective of the National Health Insurance Service in South Korea. METHODS: Data (demographic, diagnostic, laboratory, and survival) from 4674 patients undergoing dialysis enrolled in a multicenter prospective cohort study conducted in South Korea between September 2008 and December 2012 were linked to phosphate binder use, hospitalization, and cost data available from the Health Insurance Review and Assessment Service database. After propensity score matching, a dataset comprising comparable patients treated with either sevelamer (n = 501) or calcium acetate (n = 501) was used in the cost-effectiveness analysis. A Markov model was used to estimate costs, life years, quality-adjusted life years (QALYs), and cost-effectiveness over each patient's lifetime. Forty-month treatment-specific overall survival (OS) data available from the dataset were extrapolated to lifetime survival with the use of regression analysis. FINDINGS: Patients had a mean age of 56.3 years and were treated with dialysis for a mean duration of 67.6 months. Compared with calcium acetate, sevelamer was associated with an incremental cost of South Korean Won (₩) 12,246,911 ($10,819) and a gain of 1.758 life years and 1.108 QALYs per patient. This outcome yielded incremental cost-effectiveness ratios of ₩6,966,350 ($6154) and ₩11,057,699 ($9768) per life year and QALY gained, respectively. Conclusions regarding sevelamer's cost-effectiveness were insensitive to alternative assumptions in time horizon, discount rate, hospitalization rate, costs, and health utility estimates, and they remained consistent in 100% of the model iterations, considering a willingness-to-pay threshold of ₩31,894,720 ($28,176) per QALY gained. IMPLICATIONS: This analysis of real-world data found that sevelamer's higher cost relative to calcium acetate was adequately offset by improved survival among patients undergoing dialysis in South Korea. As such, sevelamer offers good value for money, representing a cost-effective alternative to calcium-based binders.

Phosphate-Binder Use in US Dialysis Patients: Prevalence, Costs, Evidence, and Policies.

Medicare costs for phosphate binders for US dialysis patients and patients with chronic kidney disease enrolled in Medicare Part D exceeded $1.5 billion in 2015. Previous data have shown that Part D costs for mineral and bone disorder medications increased faster than costs for all Part D medications for dialysis patients. Despite extensive use of phosphate binders and escalating costs, conclusive evidence is lacking that they improve important clinical end points in dialysis patients or non-dialysis-dependent patients with chronic kidney disease. Using dialysis patient data from the US Renal Data System and laboratory information from the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) CROWNWeb data, we update information on trends in phosphate-binder use, calcium and phosphorus values, and costs for Medicare-covered dialysis patients. We discuss these results in the context of evidence from clinical trials, meta-analyses, and observational studies evaluating phosphate-binder efficacy, safety, comparative effectiveness, and cost-effectiveness. Based on our analysis, we note a need for US Food and Drug Administration guidance regarding clinical evaluation of new phosphate binders, and we suggest that it would be in CMS' best interest to fund a clinical trial to assess whether lower versus higher phosphate concentrations improve hard clinical outcomes, and if so, whether particular phosphate binders are superior to placebo or other binders in improving these outcomes.

Caring for Migrants and Refugees With End-Stage Kidney Disease in Europe.

With the number of migrants and refugees increasing globally, the nephrology community is increasingly confronted with issues relating to the management of end-stage kidney disease in this population, including medical, logistical, financial, and moral-ethical questions. Beginning with data for the state of affairs regarding refugees in Europe and grounded in moral reasoning theory, this Policy Forum Perspective contends that to improve care for this specific population, there is a need for: (1) clear demarcations of responsibilities across the societal (macro), local (meso), and individual (micro) levels, such that individual providers are aware of available resources and able to provide essential medical care while societies and local communities determine the general approach to dialysis care for refugees; (2) additional data and evidence to facilitate decision making based on facts rather than emotions; and (3) better information and education in a broad sense (cultural sensitivity, legal rights and obligations, and medical knowledge) to address specific needs in this population. Although the nephrology community cannot leverage a change in the geopolitical framework, we are in a position to generate accurate data describing the dimensions of care of refugee or migrant patients with end-stage kidney disease to advocate for a holistic approach to treatment for this unique patient population.

What is the best setting for receiving dialysis vascular access repair and maintenance services?

INTRODUCTION: Advances in dialysis vascular access (DVA) management have changed where beneficiaries receive this care. The effectiveness, safety, quality, and economy of different care settings have been questioned. This study compares patient outcomes of receiving DVA services in the freestanding office-based center (FOC) to those of the hospital outpatient department (HOPD). It also examines whether outcomes differ for a centrally managed system of FOCs (CMFOC) compared to all other FOCs (AOFOC). METHODS: Retrospective cohort study of clinically and demographically similar patients within Medicare claims available through United States Renal Data System (USRDS) (2010-2013) who received at least 80% of DVA services in an FOC (n = 80,831) or HOPD (n = 133,965). Separately, FOC population is divided into CMFOC (n = 20,802) and AOFOC (n = 80,267). Propensity matching was used to control for clinical, demographic, and functional characteristics across populations. RESULTS: FOC patients experienced significantly better outcomes, including lower annual mortality (14.6% vs. 17.2%, p<0.001) and DVA-related infections (0.16 vs. 0.20, p<0.001), fewer hospitalizations (1.65 vs. 1.91, p<0.001), and lower total per-member-per-month (PMPM) payments ($5042 vs. $5361, p<0.001) than HOPD patients. CMFOC patients had lower annual mortality (12.5% vs. 13.8%, p<0.001), PMPM payments (DVA services) ($1486 vs. $1533, p<0.001) and hospitalizations ($1752 vs. $1816, p<0.001) than AOFOC patients. CONCLUSIONS: Where nephrologists send patients for DVA services can impact patient clinical and economic outcomes. This research confirmed that patients who received DVA care in the FOC had better outcomes than those treated in the HOPD. The organizational culture and clinical oversight of the CMFOC may result in more favorable outcomes than receiving care in AOFOC.

Direct Cost for Treating Chronic Kidney Disease at an Outpatient Setting of a Tertiary Hospital: Evidence from a Cross-Sectional Study.

BACKGROUND: Chronic kidney disease (CKD) has a high morbidity and mortality in developing countries. And this burden is also increasing rapidly in India. Unaffordability due to high cost of medication and hemodialysis remains one of the major barriers in the successful treatment of CKD. OBJECTIVES: To determine the direct cost involved in treating CKD at an outpatient department of a public tertiary care hospital. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was carried out at a public tertiary care hospital. Patients diagnosed with CKD by a physician were included in the study after obtaining a written informed consent. All the relevant data were collected on a predesigned case record form. RESULTS: The results are based on data obtained from 150 patients. The average age of the patients was 55.7 ± 10.1 years. The average number of drugs per prescription was found to be 6.5 ± 1.7. The annual average costs of treatment for patients on medication only and for patients on hemodialysis plus medication were Rs 25,836 (US $386) and Rs 2,13,144 (US $3181), respectively (Rs = Indian rupee). Treatment cost was found to be statistically significantly higher in patients on hemodialysis, treatment support by employer, patients with a smoking habit, patients with comorbidities, and patients with end-stage renal disease. Calcium tablets, vitamin D sachets, iron supplements, torsemide, and amlodipine were the top five medications prescribed. CONCLUSIONS: Reimbursement, patient's dialysis status, habits, and comorbidities were found to have a significant effect on the direct cost of treatment.

Economic evaluation of a pre-ESRD pay-for-performance programme in advanced chronic kidney disease patients.

BACKGROUND: The National Health Insurance Administration in Taiwan initiated a nationwide pre-end-stage renal disease (ESRD) pay-for-performance (P4P) programme at the end of 2006 to improve quality of care for chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients. This study aimed to examine this programme's effect on patients' clinical outcomes and its cost-effectiveness among advanced CKD patients. METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal observational matched cohort study using two nationwide population-based datasets. The major outcomes of interests were incidence of dialysis, all-cause mortality, direct medical costs, life years (LYs) and incremental cost-effectiveness ratio comparing matched P4P and non-P4P advanced CKD patients. Competing-risk analysis, general linear regression and bootstrapping statistical methods were used for the analysis. RESULTS: Subdistribution hazard ratio (95% confidence intervals) for advanced CKD patients enrolled in the P4P programme, compared with those who did not enrol, were 0.845 (0.779-0.916) for incidence of dialysis and 0.792 (0.673-0.932) for all-cause mortality. LYs for P4P and non-P4P patients who initiated dialysis were 2.83 and 2.74, respectively. The adjusted incremental CKD-related costs and other-cause-related costs were NT$114 704 (US$3823) and NT$32 420 (US$1080) for P4P and non-P4P patients who initiated dialysis, respectively, and NT$-3434 (US$114) and NT$45 836 (US$1572) for P4P and non-P4P patients who did not initiate dialysis, respectively, during the 3-year follow-up period. CONCLUSIONS: P4P patients had lower risks of both incidence of dialysis initiation and death. In addition, our empirical findings suggest that the P4P pre-ESRD programme in Taiwan provided a long-term cost-effective use of resources and cost savings for advanced CKD patients.

Health policies on dialysis modality selection: a nationwide population cohort study.

OBJECTIVES: In Taiwan, peritoneal dialysis (PD) and haemodialysis are fully accessible to patients with end-stage renal disease. However, the usage of PD is considered low in Taiwan. Since 2005, 4 major policies have been implemented by Taiwan's Ministry of Health and Welfare, namely a multidisciplinary predialysis care programme and usage increasing the PD incidence as a key performance indicator (KPI) for hospital accreditation, both of which were implemented in 2006; reimbursement of the glucose-free dialysate, icodextrin that was implemented in 2007; and insurance reimbursement for renting automated PD machines that was implemented in 2008. The aim of this study was to analyse the associations between the PD promotional policies and the actual PD selection rates. SETTING: We analysed data within the Taiwan Renal Registry Data System from 2006 to 2013, focusing on the PD incidence in relation to the timings of the 4 PD promotional policies; then we stratified the results according to age, sex and the presence of diabetes mellitus. PARTICIPANTS: From 2006 to 2013, 115 565 patients were enrolled in this study. The mean (SD) age of patients on PD was 54.6 (15.7) years. RESULTS: During the time frame in which the 4 PD promotional policies were implemented, the PD incidence increased from 12.8% in 2006 to 15.1% in 2009. The PD incidence started to decline in 2010 (13.8%) when the hospital accreditation policy was repealed. The 3 remaining policies were weakly associated with the PD incidence. The observational analysis determined that the patients' ages, sexes and diabetes mellitus incidence rates were relatively stable from 2006 to 2013. CONCLUSIONS: Of the 4 health policies intended to promote PD usage, using increasing the PD incidence as a KPI for hospital accreditation had the strongest association with the PD incidence.

Healthcare costs in chronic kidney disease and renal replacement therapy: a population-based cohort study in Sweden.

OBJECTIVE: To compare healthcare costs in chronic kidney disease (CKD) stage 4 or 5 not on dialysis (estimated glomerular filtration rate <30 mL/min/1.73m2), peritoneal dialysis, haemodialysis and in transplanted patients with matched general population comparators. DESIGN: Population-based cohort study. SETTING: Swedish national healthcare system. PARTICIPANTS: Prevalent adult patients with CKD 4 or 5 (n=1046, mean age 68 years), on peritoneal dialysis (n=101; 64 years), on haemodialysis (n=460; 65 years) and with renal transplants (n=825; 52 years) were identified in Stockholm County clinical quality registers for renal disease on 1 January 2010. 5 general population comparators from the same county were matched to each patient by age, sex and index year. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: Annual healthcare costs in 2009 incurred through inpatient and hospital-based outpatient care and dispensed prescription drugs ascertained from nationwide healthcare registers. Secondary outcomes were annual number of hospital days and outpatient care visits. RESULTS: Patients on haemodialysis had the highest mean annual cost (€87 600), which was 1.49 (95% CI 1.38 to 1.60) times that observed in peritoneal dialysis (€58 600). The mean annual cost was considerably lower in transplanted patients (€15 500) and in the CKD group (€9600). In patients on haemodialysis, outpatient care costs made up more than two-thirds (€62 500) of the total, while costs related to fluids ($29 900) was the largest cost component in patients on peritoneal dialysis (51%). Compared with their matched general population comparators, the mean annual cost (95% CI) in patients on haemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, transplanted patients and patients with CKD was 45 (39 to 51), 29 (22 to 37), 11 (10 to 13) and 4.0 (3.6 to 4.5) times higher, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The mean annual costs were ∼50% higher in patients on haemodialysis than in those on peritoneal dialysis. Compared with the general population, costs were substantially elevated in all groups, from 4-fold in patients with CKD to 11, 29 and 45 times higher in transplanted patients and patients on peritoneal dialysis and haemodialysis, respectively.

[Current status of alternative therapies renal function at the Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social]. / Estado actual de las terapias sustitutivas de la función renal en el Instituto Mexicano del Seguro Social.

BACKGROUND: The IMSS performs systematically the data updating of patients with renal replacement therapy (RRT) by an electronic record management referred as: Census patients with Chronical Renal Failure (CIRC) which aims to meet the prevalence of patients with chronic renal failure and the behavior of RRTat the IMSS. METHODS: A retrospective study includes 212 secondary hospitals with dialysis programs, with both pediatric and adult patients. CIRC data obtained from January to December 2014, number and nominal bonds of peritoneal dialysis (PD) and hemodialysis (HD). Prevalence of patients and therapies by delegation, distribution by gender and age, cause of kidney disease, morbidity and mortality were identified. RESULTS: 55,101 patients, of whom 29,924 were male (54 %) and 25,177 women (46 %), mean age was 62.1 years (rng: 4-90); 20,387 were pensioners (36.9 %). The causes of renal failure were: diabetes 29,054 (52.7 %), hypertension 18,975 (34.4 %), chronic glomerulopathies 3,951 (7.2 %), polycystic kidneys 1,142 (2.1 %), congenital 875 (1.6 %) and other 1,104 (2 %). HD was given in 41 % of patients, and the remaining 59 % DP; the annual cost was 5,608,290,622 pesos. CONCLUSIONS: The increased prevalence of diabetes mellitus and hypertension affect the onset of RRT, which show a catastrophic financial outlook for the Institute.

Introducción: el IMSS realiza de manera sistemática la actualización de datos de los pacientes en terapias sustitutivas de la función renal (TSFR) mediante un registro electrónico denominado: Censo de administración de pacientes con Insuficiencia Renal Crónica (CIRC), cuyo objetivo es conocer la prevalencia de pacientes con insuficiencia renal crónica y el comportamiento de las TSFR en el IMSS. Métodos: estudio retrospectivo, incluye 212 hospitales de segundo nivel con programas de diálisis, pacientes pediátricos y adultos. Datos obtenidos del CIRC de enero a diciembre de 2014, cédulas numeral y nominal de diálisis peritoneal (DP) y hemodiálisis (HD). Se identifica prevalencia de pacientes y terapias por delegación, distribución por género y edad, causa de la enfermedad renal, la morbilidad y mortalidad. Resultados: 55 101 pacientes, de los cuales fueron 29 924 masculinos (54 %) y 25 177 femeninos (46 %); edad promedio 62.1 años (rng: 4 a 90); pensionados 20 387 (36.9 %). Las causas de la insuficiencia renal fueron: diabetes 29 054 (52.7 %), hipertensión arterial 18 975 (34.4%), glomerulopatías crónicas 3951 (7.2 %), riñones poliquísticos 1142 (2.1 %), congénitos 875 (1.6 %), y otras 1104 (2 %). La HD se otorgó en 41 % de los pacientes y la DP al 59 % restante; el costo anual fue de 5 608 290 622 pesos. Conclusiones: la prevalencia incrementada de diabetes mellitus e hipertensión arterial repercuten en el inicio de una TSFR, las cuales muestran un panorama financiero catastrófico para el Instituto.

Cost comparison of kidney transplant versus dialysis in Brazil.

This study aimed to compare the direct medical costs of renal transplantation and renal replacement therapies, specifically hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, from the perspective of the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS). Renal replacement therapies costs were based on data published in the literature. Cost items for kidney transplant were identified in a private hospital based on procedure codes used for charging the SUS, and other items were taken from the literature. In the four years covered by the study, cadaver kidney transplant generated per-patient savings of BRL 37,000 and BRL 74,000 compared to hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, respectively. Savings were even greater with living donor kidney transplant: BRL 46,000 and BRL 82,000 compared to hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, respectively. This result, together with survival and quality-of-life analyses, characterizes kidney transplant as the best clinical and financial alternative, thus supporting public policies for organ transplants in Brazil.

Effectiveness, cost effectiveness, acceptability and implementation barriers/enablers of chronic kidney disease management programs for Indigenous people in Australia, New Zealand and Canada: a systematic review of mixed evidence.

BACKGROUND: Indigenous peoples in Australia, New Zealand and Canada carry a greater burden of chronic kidney disease (CKD) than the general populations in each country, and this burden is predicted to increase. Given the human and economic cost of dialysis, understanding how to better manage CKD at earlier stages of disease progression is an important priority for practitioners and policy-makers. A systematic review of mixed evidence was undertaken to examine the evidence relating to the effectivness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of chronic kidney disease management programs designed for Indigenous people, as well as barriers and enablers of implementation of such programs. METHODS: Published and unpublished studies reporting quantitative and qualitative data on health sector-led management programs and models of care explicitly designed to manage, slow progression or otherwise improve the lives of Indigenous people with CKD published between 2000 and 2014 were considered for inclusion. Data on clinical effectiveness, ability to self-manage, quality of life, acceptability, cost and cost-benefit, barriers and enablers of implementation were of interest. Quantitative data was summarized in narrative and tabular form and qualitative data was synthesized using the Joanna Briggs Institute meta-aggregation approach. RESULTS: Ten studies were included. Six studies provided evidence of clinical effectiveness of CKD programs designed for Indigenous people, two provided evidence of cost and cost-effectiveness of a CKD program, and two provided qualitative evidence of barriers and enablers of implementation of effective and/or acceptable CKD management programs. Common features of effective and acceptable programs were integration within existing services, nurse-led care, intensive follow-up, provision of culturally-appropriate education, governance structures supporting community ownership, robust clinical systems supporting communication and a central role for Indigenous Health Workers. CONCLUSIONS: Given the human cost of dialysis and the growing population of people living with CKD, there is an urgent need to draw lessons from the available evidence from this and other sources, including studies in the broader population, to better serve this population with programs that address the barriers to receiving high-quality care and improve quality of life.

How to meet the demand for good quality renal dialysis as part of universal health coverage in resource-limited settings?

BACKGROUND: It is very challenging for resource-limited settings to introduce universal health coverage (UHC), particularly regarding the inclusion of high-cost renal dialysis as part of the UHC benefit package. This paper addresses three issues: (1) whether a setting commits to include renal dialysis in its UHC benefit package and if so, why and how; (2) how to ensure quality of renal dialysis services; and (3) how to improve the quality of life of patients using psychosocial and community interventions. DISCUSSION: This article reviews experiences of renal dialysis programs in seven settings based on presentations and discussions during the International Forum on Peritoneal Dialysis as a Priority Health Policy in Asia. A literature review was conducted to verify and validate the data as well as to fill information gaps presented in the forum. Five out of the seven settings implemented renal dialysis as part of their benefits package, while the other two have pilots or programs in their nascent stage. Renal replacement therapy has become part of the universal access package because these governments recognize the rising number of chronic kidney disease (CKD) cases, the catastrophically high costs of treatment, and that this is the only life-saving treatment available to patients. The recommendations are as follows: Governments should have a holistic approach to CKD interventions, including primary prevention as well as psychosocial interventions. Governments should consider subsidizing CKD treatment costs depending on their resources. Multi-stakeholder cooperation should be facilitated to enact these policies and conduct research and development for all aspects of interventions. International collaboration should be initiated to share experiences, good practices, and joint activities (e.g. capacity building and multinational procurement of medical supplies). CONCLUSION: This study provides practical recommendations to country governments as well as the international community on how to meet the demand for good quality renal dialysis as part of UHC in resource-limited settings.

Uma comparação dos custos do transplante renal em relação às diálises no Brasil / Cost comparison of kidney transplant versus dialysis in Brazil / Una comparación de los costes del trasplante renal en relación con las diálisis en Brasil

Resumo: O objetivo do presente estudo foi comparar os custos médicos diretos do transplante renal e das terapias renais substitutivas, especificamente a hemodiálise e a diálise peritoneal, sob a perspectiva do Sistema Único de Saúde (SUS). Os custos das terapias renais substitutivas foram extraídos de informações publicadas na literatura. Os itens de custo previstos do transplante renal foram identificados em um hospital privado mediante coleta dos códigos dos procedimentos utilizados para a cobrança do SUS e os demais itens extraídos da literatura. O resultado desta pesquisa indica que, no período dos quatro anos coberto por este estudo, o transplante renal de doador falecido gera uma economia, por paciente, de R$ 37 mil e R$ 74 mil em relação à hemodiálise e à diálise peritoneal, respectivamente. Quanto ao transplante renal de doador vivo, as economias são ainda maiores: R$ 46 mil e R$ 82 mil em relação à hemodiálise e à diálise peritoneal, respectivamente. Este resultado, aliado a análises de sobrevida e qualidade de vida, pode caracterizar o transplante renal como a melhor alternativa do ponto de vista financeiro e clínico, auxiliando na formulação de políticas públicas relacionadas com os transplantes de órgãos no Brasil.

Abstract: This study aimed to compare the direct medical costs of renal transplantation and renal replacement therapies, specifically hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, from the perspective of the Brazilian Unified National Health System (SUS). Renal replacement therapies costs were based on data published in the literature. Cost items for kidney transplant were identified in a private hospital based on procedure codes used for charging the SUS, and other items were taken from the literature. In the four years covered by the study, cadaver kidney transplant generated per-patient savings of BRL 37,000 and BRL 74,000 compared to hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, respectively. Savings were even greater with living donor kidney transplant: BRL 46,000 and BRL 82,000 compared to hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, respectively. This result, together with survival and quality-of-life analyses, characterizes kidney transplant as the best clinical and financial alternative, thus supporting public policies for organ transplants in Brazil.

Resumen: El objetivo del presente estudio fue comparar los costes médicos directos del trasplante renal y de las terapias renales substitutivas, específicamente la hemodiálisis y la diálisis peritoneal, bajo la perspectiva del Sistema Único de Salud (SUS). Los costes de las terapias renales substitutivas se extrajeron de información publicada en la literatura. Los ítems de coste previstos del trasplante renal se identificaron en un hospital privado, a partir de la recogida de códigos de procedimientos utilizados para el cobro del SUS y los demás ítems extraídos de la literatura. El resultado de esta investigación indica que, en el período de los 4 años cubierto por este estudio, el trasplante renal del donante fallecido genera un ahorro, por paciente, de R$ 37 mil y R$ 74 mil en relación al hemodiálisis y al diálisis peritoneal, respectivamente. En cuanto al trasplante renal del donante vivo, los ahorros son incluso mayores: R$ 46 mil y R$ 82 mil, en relación a la hemodiálisis y a la diálisis peritoneal, respectivamente. Este resultado, junto con análisis de supervivencia y calidad de vida, puede caracterizar el trasplante renal como la mejor alternativa desde el punto de vista financiero y clínico, auxiliando en la formulación de políticas públicas relacionadas con los trasplantes de órganos en Brasil.

Medicare Advantage associated with lower mortality for incident dialysis patients.

Physicians across the care continuum are increasingly aligned around the belief that coordinated care can improve patient outcomes. As the principal caregivers for one of the most medically fragile patient groups in healthcare, nephrologists are especially attuned to the potential value of integrated care. Medicare Advantage (MA) offers one way to test this hypothesis. By law, end-stage renal disease patients currently cannot enroll into an MA plan, but if they develop ESRD while in such a plan, they may continue to be enrolled. The contrast between these patients and their counterparts who carry Medicare fee for service (MFFS) thereby represents a natural experiment that affords an opportunity to examine whether enrollment in a coordinated care system may improve outcomes. In order to promote (unbiased) comparison of patients in a non-randomized context, we propensity score-matched incident dialysis patients enrolled in MA versus those in MFFS. The data demonstrate that patients who were enrolled in an MA plan upon initiation of dialysis had a 9% lower mortality rate than their MFFS counterparts. This beneficial association of MA enrollment was found to be sustained over the first two years of dialysis treatment.

The economic impact of improving phosphate binder therapy adherence and attainment of guideline phosphorus goals in hemodialysis patients: a Medicare cost-offset model.

INTRODUCTION: Hyperphosphatemia (serum phosphorus >5.5 mg/dL) in hemodialysis patients is a key factor in mineral and bone disorders and is associated with increased hospitalization and mortality risks. Treatment with oral phosphate binders offers limited benefit in achieving target serum phosphorus concentrations due to high daily pill burden (7-10 pills/day) and associated poor medication adherence. The economic value of improving phosphate binder adherence and increasing percent time in range (PTR) for target phosphorus concentrations has not been previously assessed in dialysis patients. The current retrospective analysis was conducted to summarize health care cost savings to United States (US) payers associated with improved phosphate binder adherence and increased PTR for target phosphorus concentrations in adult end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients receiving hemodialysis therapy. METHODS: Phosphate binder adherence and PTR were derived from hemodialysis patients who were treated at a large dialysis organization between January 2007 and December 2011. Cost model inputs were derived from US Renal Data System data between July 2007 and December 2009. A cost-offset model was constructed to estimate monthly and annual incremental health care costs (total Medicare; inpatient, outpatient, and Medicare Part B) associated with different levels of phosphate binder adherence and PTR. Model inputs included number of ESRD patients, population adherence to phosphate binders, PTR associated with adherence to phosphate binders, and per-patient per-month cost associated with PTR. A base case model estimated monthly and annual costs of phosphate binder therapy in the population using estimated model inputs. The estimated adherence rate was used to determine number of patients in compliant and noncompliant groups. Monthly costs were calculated as the sum of per-patient per-month cost times the number of patients in adherent and nonadherent groups. Annual costs were monthly costs times 12 and assumed the same level of adherence, PTR, and per-patient per-month costs over time. To study the impact of improving phosphate binder adherence and PTR on cost outcomes, we hypothetically and simultaneously increased both base phosphate binders adherence and PTR for adherent patients (adherence/PTR: 10/20%, 20/40%, 30/60%). Monthly and annual costs were derived for each scenario and compared against the results of the base case model. One-way sensitivity analysis was performed to test model robustness. RESULTS: The base case model estimated total Medicare and inpatient costs of $5,152,342 and $1,435,644, respectively (N = 1,000). When base case model costs were compared to results of each extended model scenario, overall Medicare cost savings (range 0.3-1.9%) and inpatient cost savings (range 1.2-5.7%) were observed. The one-way sensitivity analysis indicated that results were sensitive to PTR for adherent and nonadherent patients and the factor used to increase adherence rate and PTR associated with adherence in the hypothetical scenarios. However, cost savings in overall Medicare costs and inpatient costs were still noted. CONCLUSION: Increasing phosphate binder adherence and improving phosphorus control were associated with increased cost savings in total Medicare costs and inpatient costs.