Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Am J Nephrol ; 50(4): 320-328, 2019.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31434095

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Hemodialysis (HD) in end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients requires vascular access (VA) through an arteriovenous fistula (AVF), a prosthetic arteriovenous graft (AVG), or a central venous catheter. While AVF or AVG is commonly used for HD, the economic implications of AVF versus AVG use have not been fully established. We describe the healthcare resource utilization and costs of AVF and AVG use for incident ESRD patients in the United States. METHODS: This observational cohort study of AVF and AVG placements used data from the United States Renal Data System to identify and follow access placements. AVF and AVG placements after ESRD onset for incident patients from 2012 to 2014 with continuous Medicare primary coverage were included. All-cause and access-related Medicare costs were averaged over the placement lifetime and expressed as per dialysis-month costs. RESULTS: The analysis included 38,035 AVF placements and 12,789 AVG placements. Total all-cause monthly costs for AVF averaged USD 8,508; mean monthly costs were USD 3,027 for inpatient (IP), USD 3,139 for outpatient (OP), USD 1,572 for physician services, and USD 770 for other care settings. Access-related monthly costs averaged USD 1,699 and represented 20% of all-cause charges for AVFs. Mean all-cause monthly costs for AVG were USD 9,605; by setting monthly costs were USD 3,811 for IP, USD 3,034 for OP, USD 1,881 for physician services and USD 879 for other care settings. Access-related monthly costs averaged USD 2,656 and represented 28% of all-cause charges for AVGs. DISCUSSION/CONCLUSIONS: This study indicates that costs due to VA are a significant burden on Medicare budgets and on patients. The factors driving access-related utilization and costs merit attention in future research. Both optimizing process of care and discovery innovation may significantly accelerate better stewardship of available healthcare resources.


Asunto(s)
Fístula Arteriovenosa/economía , Derivación Arteriovenosa Quirúrgica/economía , Costos de la Atención en Salud , Medicare/economía , Diálisis Renal/economía , Anciano , Fístula Arteriovenosa/complicaciones , Derivación Arteriovenosa Quirúrgica/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular , Catéteres Venosos Centrales/efectos adversos , Femenino , Oclusión de Injerto Vascular , Humanos , Fallo Renal Crónico/complicaciones , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Diálisis Renal/efectos adversos , Factores de Tiempo , Estados Unidos , Grado de Desobstrucción Vascular
2.
Am J Nephrol ; 49(2): 156-164, 2019.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30677763

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Chronic hemodialysis requires a mode of vascular access through an arteriovenous fistula (AVF), a prosthetic arteriovenous graft (AVG), or a central venous catheter (CVC). AVF is recommended over AVG or CVC due to increased patency and decreased intervention rates for those that mature. AVG are preferred over CVC due to decreased infection and mortality risk. The aims of this study were to evaluate the lifespan of AVF and AVG in maturation, sustained access use, and abandonment. METHODS: The United States Renal Data System (USRDS), Medicare claims, and CROWNWeb were used to identify access placements. Patients with a first end-stage renal disease (ESRD) service from January 1, 2012 to June 30, 2014 with continuous coverage with Medicare as primary payer and ≥1 AVF or AVG placed after ESRD onset were included. Maturation was defined as the first use of the access for hemodialysis recorded in CROWNWeb. Sustained access use was defined as 3 consecutive months of use without catheter placement or replacement. Accesses that were never used at any time post-placement were considered abandoned. RESULTS: The cohort included 38,035 AVF placements and 12,789 AVG placements. Sixty-nine percent of AVF and 72% of AVG matured. Fifty-two percent of AVF and 51% of AVG achieved sustained access use. One quarter of AVF and 14% of AVG were abandoned without use as recorded in CROWNWeb. CONCLUSION: Although considered the gold standard for vascular access, only half of AVF and AVG placements achieved sustained access use. The USRDS database has inherent limitations but provides useful clinical insight into maturation, sustained use, and abandonment.


Asunto(s)
Derivación Arteriovenosa Quirúrgica/efectos adversos , Implantación de Prótesis Vascular/efectos adversos , Oclusión de Injerto Vascular/epidemiología , Fallo Renal Crónico/terapia , Diálisis Renal/efectos adversos , Reclamos Administrativos en el Cuidado de la Salud/estadística & datos numéricos , Adolescente , Adulto , Anciano , Bases de Datos Factuales/estadística & datos numéricos , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Oclusión de Injerto Vascular/etiología , Humanos , Masculino , Medicare/estadística & datos numéricos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Diálisis Renal/métodos , Resultado del Tratamiento , Estados Unidos/epidemiología , Grado de Desobstrucción Vascular , Adulto Joven
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA