BACKGROUND: Although evidence suggests that a higher hemodialysis dose and/or frequency may be associated with improved outcomes, the cost-effectiveness of a daily hemodialysis strategy for critically ill patients with acute kidney injury (AKI) is unknown. METHODS: We developed a Markov model of the cost, quality of life, survival, and incremental cost-effectiveness of daily hemodialysis, compared with alternate-day hemodialysis, for patients with AKI in the intensive care unit (ICU). We employed a societal perspective with a lifetime analytic time horizon. We modeled the efficacy of daily hemodialysis as a reduction in the relative risk of death on the basis of data reported in the 2004 clinical trial published by Schiffl et al. We performed 1- and 2-way sensitivity analyses across cost, efficacy, and utility input variables. The main outcome measure was cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). RESULTS: In the base case for a 60-year-old man, daily hemodialysis was projected to add 2.14 QALYs and $10,924 in cost. We found that the cost-effectiveness of daily hemodialysis compared with alternate-day hemodialysis was $5084 per QALY gained. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio became less favorable (>$50,000 per QALY gained) when the maintenance hemodialysis rate of the daily hemodialysis group was varied to more than 27% and when the difference in 14-day postdischarge mortality between the alternatives was varied to less than 0.5%. CONCLUSION: Daily hemodialysis is a cost-effective strategy compared with alternate-day hemodialysis for patients with severe AKI in the ICU.
BACKGROUND: Although evidence suggests that a higher hemodialysis dose and/or frequency may be associated with improved outcomes, the cost-effectiveness of a daily hemodialysis strategy for critically illpatients with acute kidney injury (AKI) is unknown. METHODS: We developed a Markov model of the cost, quality of life, survival, and incremental cost-effectiveness of daily hemodialysis, compared with alternate-day hemodialysis, for patients with AKI in the intensive care unit (ICU). We employed a societal perspective with a lifetime analytic time horizon. We modeled the efficacy of daily hemodialysis as a reduction in the relative risk of death on the basis of data reported in the 2004 clinical trial published by Schiffl et al. We performed 1- and 2-way sensitivity analyses across cost, efficacy, and utility input variables. The main outcome measure was cost per quality-adjusted life-year (QALY). RESULTS: In the base case for a 60-year-old man, daily hemodialysis was projected to add 2.14 QALYs and $10,924 in cost. We found that the cost-effectiveness of daily hemodialysis compared with alternate-day hemodialysis was $5084 per QALY gained. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio became less favorable (>$50,000 per QALY gained) when the maintenance hemodialysis rate of the daily hemodialysis group was varied to more than 27% and when the difference in 14-day postdischarge mortality between the alternatives was varied to less than 0.5%. CONCLUSION: Daily hemodialysis is a cost-effective strategy compared with alternate-day hemodialysis for patients with severe AKI in the ICU.
Authors: Yeohan Song; Julie H Y Tai; Sarah M Bartsch; Richard K Zimmerman; Robert R Muder; Bruce Y Lee Journal: Vaccine Date: 2012-03-29 Impact factor: 3.641
Authors: V Schwenger; D Kindgen-Milles; C Willam; A Jörres; W Druml; D Czock; S J Klein; M Oppert; M Schmitz; J T Kielstein; A Zarbock; M Joannidis; S John Journal: Med Klin Intensivmed Notfmed Date: 2018-03-15 Impact factor: 0.840
Authors: Robert Faulhaber-Walter; Sebastian Scholz; Herrmann Haller; Jan T Kielstein; Carsten Hafer Journal: Int J Nephrol Renovasc Dis Date: 2016-05-23