Hidden Costs Associated with Conversion from Peritoneal Dialysis to Hemodialysis.

Background: Increasing use of peritoneal dialysis (PD) will likely lead to increasing numbers of patients transitioning from PD to hemodialysis (HD). We describe the characteristics of patients who discontinued PD and converted to HD, trajectories of acute-care encounter rates and the total cost of care both before and after PD discontinuation, and the incidence of modality-related outcomes after PD discontinuation. Methods: We analyzed data in the United States Renal Data System to identify patients aged ≥12 years who were newly diagnosed with ESKD in 2001-2017, initiated PD during the first year of ESKD, and discontinued PD in 2009-2018. We estimated monthly rates of hospital admissions, observation stays, emergency department encounters, and Medicare Parts A and B costs during the 12 months before and after conversion from PD to HD, and the incidence of home HD initiation, death, and kidney transplantation after conversion to in-facility HD. Results: Among 232,699 patients who initiated PD, there were 124,213 patients who discontinued PD. Among them, 68,743 (55%) converted to HD. In this subgroup, monthly rates of acute-care encounters and total costs of care to Medicare sharply increased during the 6 months preceding PD discontinuation, peaking at 96.2 acute-care encounters per 100 patient-months and $20,701 per patient in the last month of PD. After conversion, rates decreased, but remained higher than before conversion. Among patients who converted to in-facility HD, the cumulative incidence of home HD initiation, death, and kidney transplantation at 24 months was 3%, 25%, and 7%, respectively. Conclusions: The transition from PD to HD is characterized by high rates of acute-care encounters and health-care expenditures. Quality improvement efforts should be aimed at improving transitions and encouraging both home HD and kidney transplantation after PD discontinuation.

A lifelong quest to make home hemodialysis simple, safe, and effective: A review of outcomes of 12 major projects.

In the course of over four decades, I have worked with an R&D team on 12 major R&D projects, all with the goal of making hemodialysis simple, safe, effective, and suitable for use in the home. Our team has worked within a University and in private companies and has collaborated with major healthcare drug and device companies. As a practicing nephrologist, my definition of success is when I see the device or drug we helped to develop in widespread clinical use. By this measure, two of the projects were highly successful, but seven failed. Most failures were due to decisions made by various corporations, governmental agencies, and venture capital groups, out of the hands or control of the R&D company. Three projects are still ongoing. There is no shortage of creativity or new ideas in nephrology and in dialysis. The major challenge is in the commercialization of the products.

Pilot health technology assessment study: organizational and economic impact of remote monitoring system for home automated peritoneal dialysis.

PURPOSE: Follow-up of automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) has been improved by data transmission by cellular modem and internet cloud. With the new remote patient monitoring (RPM) technology, clinical control and prescription of dialysis are performed by software (Baxter Claria-Sharesource), which allows the center to access home operational data. The objective of this pilot study was to determine the impact of RPM compared to traditional technology, in clinical, organizational, social, and economic terms in a single center. METHODS: We studied 21 prevalent APD patients aged 69 ± 13 years, on dialysis for a median of 9 months, for a period of 6 months with the traditional technology and 6 months with the new technology. A relevant portion of patients lived in mountainous or hilly areas. RESULTS: Our study shows more proactive calls from the center to patients after the consultation of RPM software, reduction of calls from patients and caregivers, early detection of clinical problems, a significant reduction of unscheduled visits, and a not significant reduction of hospitalizations. The analysis also highlighted how the RPM system lead to relevant economic savings, which for the health system have been calculated € 335 (mean per patient-month). With the social costs represented by the waste of time of the patient and the caregiver, we calculated € 685 (mean per patient-month). CONCLUSION: In our pilot report, the RPM system allowed the accurate assessment of daily APD sessions to suggest significative organizational and economic advantages, and both patients and healthcare providers reported good subjective experiences in terms of safety and quality of follow-up.

Going Home: Access for Home Modalities.

The cost and health burden of ESRD continues to increase globally. Total Medicare expenditure on dialysis has increased from 229 million USD in 1973 to 35.4 billion USD in 2016. Dialysis access can represent almost a tenth of these costs. Central venous catheters have been recognized as a significant factor driving costs and mortality in this population. Home dialysis, which includes peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis, is an effective way of reducing costs related to renal replacement therapy, reducing central venous catheter usage and in many cases improving the clinical and psychosocial aspects of patients' health. Addressing access-related issues for peritoneal dialysis, urgent-start peritoneal dialysis and home hemodialysis can have impact on the success of home dialysis. This article reviews issues related to dialysis access for home therapies.

[Remote patient monitoring in dialysis patients: the "change of pace" for home dialysis.] / Monitoraggio da remoto del paziente in dialisi: il cambio di passo per la dialisi domiciliare?

Lockdown and self-isolation are to date the only solution to limit the spread of recent outbreak of coronavirus disease (CoViD-19), highlighting the great advantage of home dialysis in a patient otherwise forced to travel from / to the dialysis center to receive this "life-saving" treatment. Indeed, to prevent spreading of CoViD-19 infection among extremely fragile dialysis patients, as well as among dialysis workers, hemodialysis (HD) centers are adopting specific procedures ("dedicated" dialysis facilities, portable osmosis, etc.) with a great economic and organizational commitment. Peritoneal dialysis (PD) represents a type of home dialysis therapy not yet adequately implemented to date, in spite of safe and simple practice, as well as similar dialytic efficiency vs in-center hemodialysis. Remote patient monitoring (RPM) systems have been developed in automated PD (APD) cyclers in order to improve the acceptance of this dialysis method, to increase the compliance to the prescribed therapy and to control treatment adequacy. In this review we assess the potential advantages of RPM in APD, that are the chance for patients to acquire greater independence and safety in the home treatment, to allow better access to care for residents in remote areas, faster resolution of problems, reduction in hospitalizations and mortality rates, as well as time and cost saving for both the patient and the staff. The use of medical devices (sphygmomanometer, glucometer, balance, etc.), connected by wireless to the clinician's portal, might also allow a wider diffusion of incremental dialysis, an integrated therapy that combines conservative management of ESKD patients with a soft dialysis based on the residual kidney function and symptomatology, with potential prognosis and economic benefits. Although the majority of the studies are small and observational, a wider use of RPM systems is desirable to broaden the spread of home dialysis, as we learnt from Coronavirus pandemic.

Early Delays in Insurance Coverage and Long-term Use of Home-based Peritoneal Dialysis.

BACKGROUND: Uninsured patients with end-stage renal disease face barriers to peritoneal dialysis (PD), a type of home dialysis that is associated with improved quality of life and reduced Medicare costs. Although uninsured patients using PD at dialysis start receive retroactive Medicare coverage for required predialysis services, coverage only applies for the calendar month of dialysis start. Thus, initiating dialysis later in the month yields longer retroactive coverage. OBJECTIVES: To examine whether differences in retroactive Medicare were associated with decreased long-term PD use. RESEARCH DESIGN: We exploited the dialysis start date using a regression discontinuity design on a national cohort from the US Renal Data System. SUBJECTS: 36,256 uninsured adults starting dialysis between January 1, 2006 and December 31, 2014. MEASURES: PD use at dialysis days 1, 90, 180, and 360. RESULTS: Starting dialysis on the first versus last day of the calendar month was associated with an absolute decrease in PD use of 2.7% [95% confidence interval (CI), 1.5%-3.9%], or a relative decrease of 20% (95% CI, 12%-27%) at dialysis day 360. The absolute decrease was 5.5% (95% CI, 3.5%-7.2%) after Medicare established provider incentives for PD in 2011 and 7.2% (95% CI, 2.5%-11.9%) after Medicaid expansion in 2014. Patients were unlikely to switch from hemodialysis to PD after the first month of dialysis (probability of 6.9% in month 1, 1.5% in month 2, and 0.9% in month 4). CONCLUSIONS: Extending retroactive coverage for preparatory dialysis services could increase PD use and reduce overall Medicare spending in the uninsured.

Lifetime cost-effectiveness analysis of first-line dialysis modalities for patients with end-stage renal disease under peritoneal dialysis first policy.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the lifetime cost-effectiveness of first-line dialysis modalities for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients under the "Peritoneal Dialysis First" policy. METHODS: Lifetime cost-effectiveness analyses from both healthcare provider and societal perspectives were performed using Markov modelling by simulating at age 60. Empirical data on costs and health utility scores collected from our studies were combined with published data on health state transitions and survival data to estimate the lifetime cost, quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) and cost-effectiveness of three competing dialysis modalities: peritoneal dialysis (PD), hospital-based haemodialysis (HD) and nocturnal home HD. RESULTS: For cost-effectiveness analysis over a lifetime horizon from the perspective of healthcare provider, hospital-based HD group (lifetime cost USD$142,389; 6.58 QALYs) was dominated by the PD group (USD$76,915; 7.13 QALYs). Home-based HD had the highest effectiveness (8.37 QALYs) but with higher cost (USD$97,917) than the PD group. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) was USD$16,934 per QALY gained for home-based HD over PD. From the societal perspective, the results were similar and the ICER was USD$1195 per QALY gained for home-based HD over PD. Both ICERs fell within the acceptable thresholds. Changes in model parameters via sensitivity analyses had a minimal impact on ICER values. CONCLUSIONS: This study assessed the cost-effectiveness of dialysis modalities and service delivery models for ESRD patients under "Peritoneal Dialysis First" policy. For both healthcare provider and societal perspectives, PD as first-line dialysis modality was cost-saving relative to hospital-based HD, supporting the existing PD First or favoured policy. When compared with PD, Nocturnal home Home-based HD was considered a cost-effective first-line dialysis modality for ESRD patients.

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

Background:How and where to initiate dialysis are policy challenges with enormous economic and health consequences. Initiating with home hemodialysis (HD) or peritoneal dialysis (PD) may reduce costs and improve outcomes but evidence is conflicting.Methods:We conducted a population-based study in patients aged ≥ 18 years who initiated chronic dialysis in the province of Ontario, Canada from 2006 to 2014 (N = 12,691) using linked administrative data. Patients were grouped by initial modality: facility HD, facility short daily or slow nocturnal (SD/SN) HD, PD, home HD. We estimated publicly-paid healthcare costs (2015 Canadian dollars; 1 = 0.947 US dollar) and survival, from dialysis initiation to March 2015.Results:By 5 years after dialysis initiation, mean 30-day costs (as-treated) for patients receiving PD and home HD were 50% and 64% lower, respectively, than for facility HD patients ($11,011). Approximately 50% of costs were unrelated to dialysis, reflecting high comorbidity in these patients. With covariate adjustment, mean 5-year cumulative costs were similar for initiators of home HD and PD ($304,178 and $349,338) and higher for facility HD initiators ($410,981). The highest 5-year unadjusted survival was for home HD patients (80%), followed by PD (52%), SD/SN HD (50%), and facility HD (42%).Conclusions:This study in a large cohort over 9 years provides new population-based evidence suggesting that initiating dialysis at home is cost-effective, with lower costs and better survival, than starting with facility HD. Survival differences persisted after adjustment for baseline characteristics but we could not adjust for functional status or severity of comorbidities.

Expanded Prospective Payment System and Use of and Outcomes with Home Dialysis by Race and Ethnicity in the United States.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: We investigated whether the recent growth in home dialysis use was proportional among all racial/ethnic groups and also whether there were changes in racial/ethnic differences in home dialysis outcomes. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: This observational cohort study of US Renal Data System patients initiating dialysis from 2005 to 2013 used logistic regression to estimate racial/ethnic differences in home dialysis initiation over time, and used competing risk models to assess temporal changes in racial/ethnic differences in home dialysis outcomes, specifically: (1) transfer to in-center hemodialysis (HD), (2) mortality, and (3) transplantation. RESULTS: Of the 523,526 patients initiating dialysis from 2005 to 2013, 55% were white, 28% black, 13% Hispanic, and 4% Asian. In the earliest era (2005-2007), 8.0% of white patients initiated dialysis with home modalities, as did a similar proportion of Asians (9.2%; adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 0.95; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], 0.86 to 1.05), whereas lower proportions of black [5.2%; aOR, 0.71; 95% CI, 0.66 to 0.76] and Hispanic (5.7%; aOR, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.86 to 0.93) patients did so. Over time, home dialysis use increased in all groups and racial/ethnic differences decreased (2011-2013: 10.6% of whites, 8.3% of blacks [aOR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.77 to 0.85], 9.6% of Hispanics [aOR, 0.94; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.00], 14.2% of Asians [aOR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.86 to 1.12]). Compared with white patients, the risk of transferring to in-center HD was higher in blacks, similar in Hispanics, and lower in Asians; these differences remained stable over time. The mortality rate was lower for minority patients than for white patients; this difference increased over time. Transplantation rates were lower for blacks and similar for Hispanics and Asians; over time, the difference in transplantation rates between blacks and Hispanics versus whites increased. CONCLUSIONS: From 2005 to 2013, as home dialysis use increased, racial/ethnic differences in initiating home dialysis narrowed, without worsening rates of death or transfer to in-center HD in minority patients, as compared with white patients.

Operationalizing Telehealth for Home Dialysis Patients in the United States.

Until January 2019, Medicare beneficiaries requiring maintenance dialysis therapy were eligible for telehealth services only if the originating site was located in a rural area and the patient was situated in an authorized facility. Free-standing dialysis facilities and the patient's home were clearly restricted sites. Beginning in 2019, new opportunities are available for home dialysis patients in the United States to engage in telehealth; these include existing waivers within End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) Seamless Care Organizations (ESCOs) participating in the Comprehensive ESRD Care demonstration project and, more broadly, for most prevalent home dialysis patients based on legislation within the 2018 Bipartisan Budget Act. Under this act, Medicare will pay for a monthly comprehensive telehealth encounter with the patient that originates from his or her home or a dialysis unit without geographic restrictions. The home dialysis patient has the sole power to choose the telehealth option, which may occur twice over a 3-month cycle and cannot occur during the first 3 months of home dialysis therapy. With studies suggesting that effective use of remote monitoring and telehealth encounters may improve patient satisfaction and outcomes while reducing the cost of care, increased use of telehealth has the potential to improve patient-centered care for home dialysis patients. In this perspective, we review the legislative changes, regulatory requirements, and technical and operational challenges for conducting telehealth encounters for home dialysis patients.

Buttonhole versus Stepladder Cannulation for Home Hemodialysis: A Multicenter, Randomized, Pilot Trial.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Canadian home hemodialysis guidelines highlight the potential differences in complications associated with arteriovenous fistula (AVF) cannulation technique as a research priority. Our primary objective was to determine the feasibility of randomizing patients with ESKD training for home hemodialysis to buttonhole versus stepladder cannulation of the AVF. Secondary objectives included training time, pain with needling, complications, and cost by cannulation technique. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: All patients training for home hemodialysis at seven Canadian hospitals were assessed for eligibility, and demographic information and access type was collected on everyone. Patients who consented to participate were randomized to buttonhole or stepladder cannulation technique. Time to train for home hemodialysis, pain scores on cannulation, and complications over 12 months was recorded. For eligible but not randomized patients, reasons for not participating in the trial were documented. RESULTS: Patient recruitment was November 2013 to November 2015. During this time, 158 patients began training for home hemodialysis, and 108 were ineligible for the trial. Diabetes mellitus as a cause of ESKD (31% versus 12%) and central venous catheter use (74% versus 6%) were more common in ineligible patients. Of the 50 eligible patients, 14 patients from four out of seven sites consented to participate in the study (28%). The most common reason for declining to participate was a strong preference for a particular cannulation technique (33%). Patients randomized to buttonhole versus stepladder cannulation required a shorter time to complete home hemodialysis training. We did not observe a reduction in cannulation pain or complications with the buttonhole method. Data linkages for a formal cost analysis were not conducted. CONCLUSIONS: We were unable to demonstrate the feasibility of conducting a randomized, controlled trial of buttonhole versus stepladder cannulation in Canada with a sufficient number of patients on home hemodialysis to be able to draw meaningful conclusions.

Direct and indirect costs of end-stage renal disease patients in the first and second years after initiation of nocturnal home haemodialysis, hospital haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis.

PURPOSE: To estimate the direct and indirect costs of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients in the first and second years of initiating peritoneal dialysis (PD), hospital-based haemodialysis (HD) and nocturnal home HD. METHODS: A cost analysis was performed to estimate the annual costs of PD, hospital-based HD and nocturnal home HD for ESRD patients from both the health service provider's and societal perspectives. Empirical data on healthcare resource use, patients' out-of-pocket costs, time spent on transportation and dialysis by ESRD patients and time spent by caregivers were analysed. All costs were expressed in Hong Kong year 2017 dollars. RESULTS: Analysis was based on 402 ESRD patients on maintenance dialysis (PD: 189; hospital-based HD: 170; and nocturnal home HD: 43). From the perspective of the healthcare provider, hospital-based HD had the highest total annual direct medical costs in the initial year (mean ± SD) (hospital-based HD = $400 057 ± 62 822; PD = $118 467 ± 15 559; nocturnal home HD = $223 358 ± 18 055; P < 0.001) and second year (hospital-based HD = $360 924 ± 63 014; PD = $80 796 ± 15 820; nocturnal home HD = $87 028 ± 9059; P < 0.001). From the societal perspective, hospital-based HD had the highest total annual costs in the initial year (hospital-based HD = $452 151 ± 73 327; PD = $189 191 ± 61 735; nocturnal home HD = $242 038 ± 28 281; P < 0.001) and second year (hospital-based HD = $413 017 ± 73 501; PD = $151 520 ± 60 353; nocturnal home HD = $105 708 ± 23 853; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: This study quantified the economic burden of ESRD patients, and assessed the annual healthcare and societal costs in the initial and second years of PD, hospital-based HD and nocturnal home HD in Hong Kong. From both perspectives, PD is cost-saving relative to hospital-based HD and nocturnal home HD, except that nocturnal home HD has the lowest cost in the second year of treatment from the societal perspective. Results from this cost analysis facilitate economic evaluation in Hong Kong for health services and management targeted at ESRD patients.

Can economic incentives increase the use of home dialysis?

There are advantages to home dialysis for patients, and kidney care programs, but use remains low in most countries. Health-care policy-makers have many levers to increase use of home dialysis, one of them being economic incentives. These include how health-care funding is provided to kidney care programs and dialysis facilities; how physicians are remunerated for care of home dialysis patients; and financial incentives-or removal of disincentives-for home dialysis patients. This report is based on a comprehensive literature review summarizing the impact of economic incentives for home dialysis and a workshop that brought together an international group of policy-makers, health economists and home dialysis experts to discuss how economic incentives (or removal of economic disincentives) might be used to increase the use of home dialysis. The results of the literature review and the consensus of workshop participants were that financial incentives to dialysis facilities for home dialysis (for instance, through activity-based funding), particularly in for-profit systems, could lead to a small increase in use of home dialysis. The evidence was less clear on the impact of economic incentives for nephrologists, and participants felt this was less important than a nephrologist workforce in support of home dialysis. Workshop participants felt that patient-borne costs experienced by home dialysis patients were unjust and inequitable, though participants noted that there was no evidence that decreasing patient-borne costs would increase use of home dialysis, even among low-income patients. The use of financial incentives for home dialysis-whether directed at dialysis facilities, nephrologists or patients-is only one part of a high-performing system that seeks to increase use of home dialysis.

Cost of Dialysis Therapy by Modality in Manitoba.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The prevalence of ESKD is increasing worldwide. Treating ESKD is disproportionately costly in comparison with its prevalence, mostly due to the direct cost of dialysis therapy. Here, we aim to provide a contemporary cost description of dialysis modalities, including facility-based hemodialysis, peritoneal dialysis, and home hemodialysis, provided with conventional dialysis machines and the NxStage System One. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & MEASUREMENTS: We constructed a cost-minimization model from the perspective of the Canadian single-payer health care system including all costs related to dialysis care. The labor component of costs consisted of a breakdown of activity-based per patient direct labor requirements. Other costs were taken from statements of operations for the kidney program at Seven Oaks General Hospital (Winnipeg, Canada). All costs are reported in Canadian dollars. RESULTS: Annual maintenance expenses were estimated as $64,214 for in-center facility hemodialysis, $43,816 for home hemodialysis with the NxStage System One, $39,236 for home hemodialysis with conventional dialysis machines, and $38,658 for peritoneal dialysis. Training costs for in-center facility hemodialysis, home hemodialysis with the NxStage System One, home hemodialysis with conventional dialysis machines, and peritoneal dialysis are estimated as $0, $16,143, $24,379, and $7157, respectively. The threshold point to achieve cost neutrality was determined to be 9.7 months from in-center hemodialysis to home hemodialysis with the NxStage System One, 12.6 months from in-center hemodialysis to home hemodialysis with conventional dialysis machines, and 3.2 months from in-center hemodialysis to peritoneal dialysis. CONCLUSIONS: Home modalities have lower maintenance costs, and beyond a short time horizon, they are most cost efficient when considering their incremental training expenses. PODCAST: This article contains a podcast at https://www.asn-online.org/media/podcast/CJASN/2018_07_18_CJASNPodcast_18_8_F.mp3.

Haemodialysis at home: review of current dialysis machines.

INTRODUCTION: Only a minority of patients with chronic kidney disease treated by hemodialysis are currently treated at home. Until relatively recently, the only type of hemodialysis machine available for these patients was a slightly smaller version of the standard machines used for in-center dialysis treatments. AREAS COVERED: There are now an alternative generation of dialysis machines specifically designed for home hemodialysis. The home dialysis patient wants a smaller machine, which is intuitive to use, easy to trouble shoot, robust and reliable, quick to setup and put away, requiring minimal waste disposal. The machines designed for home dialysis have some similarities in terms of touch-screen patient interfaces, and using pre-prepared cartridges to speed up setting up the machine. On the other hand, they differ in terms of whether they use slower or standard dialysate flows, prepare batches of dialysis fluid, require separate water purification equipment, or whether this is integrated, or use pre-prepared sterile bags of dialysis fluid. EXPERT COMMENTARY: Dialysis machine complexity is one of the hurdles reducing the number of patients opting for home hemodialysis and the introduction of the newer generation of dialysis machines designed for ease of use will hopefully increase the number of patients opting for home hemodialysis.

Persistent Variation in Medicare Payment Authorization for Home Hemodialysis Treatments.

OBJECTIVE: To analyze variation in medical care use attributable to Medicare's decentralized claims adjudication process as exemplified in home hemodialysis (HHD) therapy. DATA SOURCES/STUDY SETTING: Secondary data analysis using 2009-2012 paid Medicare claims for HHD and in-center hemodialysis (IHD). STUDY DESIGN: We compared variation across Medicare administrative contractors (MACs) in predicted paid treatments per standardized patient-month for HHD and IHD patients. We used ordinary least-squares regression to determine whether higher paid HHD treatment counts expanded HHD programs' presence among dialysis facilities. DATA COLLECTION: We identified HHD and IHD treatments using procedure, revenue center, and claim condition codes on type 72x claims. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: MACs varied persistently in predicted HHD treatments per patient-month, ranging from 14.3 to 21.9 treatments versus 10.9 to 12.4 IHD treatments. The presence of facilities' HHD programs was uncorrelated with average HHD payment counts. CONCLUSIONS: Medicare's claims adjudication process promotes variation in medical care use, as we observe among HHD patients. MACs' discretionary decision making, while potentially facilitating innovation, may admit inefficiency in care practice as well as inequitable access to health care services. Regulators should weigh the benefits of flexibility in local coverage decisions against those of national standards for medical necessity.

Home Dialysis in the Prospective Payment System Era.

The ESRD Prospective Payment System introduced two incentives to increase home dialysis use: bundling injectable medications into a single payment for treatment and paying for home dialysis training. We evaluated the effects of the ESRD Prospective Payment System on home dialysis use by patients starting dialysis in the United States from January 1, 2006 to August 31, 2013. We analyzed data on dialysis modality, insurance type, and comorbidities from the United States Renal Data System. We estimated the effect of the policy on home dialysis use with multivariable logistic regression and compared the effect on Medicare Parts A/B beneficiaries with the effect on patients with other types of insurance. The ESRD Prospective Payment System associated with a 5.0% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 4.0% to 6.0%) increase in home dialysis use by the end of the study period. Home dialysis use increased by 5.8% (95% CI, 4.3% to 6.9%) among Medicare beneficiaries and 4.1% (95% CI, 2.3% to 5.4%) among patients covered by other forms of health insurance. The difference between these groups was not statistically significant (1.8%; 95% CI, -0.2% to 3.8%). Conversely, in both populations, the training add-on did not associate with increases in home dialysis use beyond the effect of the policy. The ESRD Prospective Payment System bundling, but not the training add-on, associated with substantial increases in home dialysis, which were identical for both Medicare and non-Medicare patients. These spill-over effects suggest that major payment changes in Medicare can affect all patients with ESRD.

Home Hemodialysis: What Is Old Is New Again.

Home hemodialysis (HD) is undergoing a resurgence. A major driver of this is economics, however, providers are also encouraged by a combination of excellent patient outcomes and patient experiences as well as the development of newer technologies that offer ease of use. Home HD offers significant advantages in flexible scheduling and the practical implementation of extended hours dialysis. This paper explores the reasons why home HD is making a comeback and strives to offer approaches to improve the uptake of this dialysis modality.