Literature DB >> 25292402

Financial implications to Medicare from changing the dialysis modality mix under the bundled prospective payment system.

Frank X Liu1, Surrey M Walton1, Robert Leipold1, Deborah Isbell1, Thomas A Golper1.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The economic burden of treating end-stage renal disease (ESRD) continues to grow. As one response, effective January 1, 2011, Medicare implemented a bundled prospective payment system (PPS, including injectable drugs) for dialysis patients. This study investigated the 5-year budget impact on Medicare under the new PPS of changes in the distribution of patients undergoing peritoneal dialysis (PD), in-center hemodialysis (ICHD), and home hemodialysis (HHD).
METHODS: An Excel-based budget impact model was created to assess dialysis-associated Medicare costs. The model accounted for dialysis access establishment, the current monthly capitation physician payment for ESRD, Medicare dialysis payments (including start-up costs), training, oral drug costs, and the costs and probabilities of adverse events including access failure, hospitalization for access infection, pneumonia, septicemia, and cardiovascular events. United States Renal Data System (USRDS) data were used to project the US Medicare dialysis patient population across time. The baseline scenario assumed a stable distribution of PD (7.7%), HHD (1.3%) and ICHD (91.0%) over 5 years. Three comparison scenarios raised the proportions of PD and HHD by (1) 1% and 0.5%, (2) 2% and 0.75%, and (3) 3% and 1% each year; a fourth scenario held HHD constant and lowered PD by 1% per year.
RESULTS: Under the bundled PPS, scenarios that increased PD and HHD from 7.7% and 1.3% over 5 years resulted in cumulative savings to Medicare of $114.8M (Scenario 1, 11.7% PD and 3.3% HHD at year 5), $232.9M (Scenario 2, 15.7% PD and 4.3% HHD at year 5), and $350.9M (Scenario 3, 19.7% PD and 5.3% HHD at year 5). When the PD population was decreased from 7.7% in 2013 to 3.7% by 2017 with a constant HHD population, the total Medicare payment for dialysis patients increased by over $121.2M.
CONCLUSIONS: Under Medicare bundled PPS, increasing the proportion of patients on PD and HHD vs ICHD could generate substantial savings in dialysis-associated costs to Medicare.
Copyright © 2014 International Society for Peritoneal Dialysis.

Entities:  

Keywords:  End-stage renal disease; Medicare; bundled payment; dialysis; economics; financial impact analysis; prospective payment system

Mesh:

Year:  2014        PMID: 25292402      PMCID: PMC4269500          DOI: 10.3747/pdi.2013.00305

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Perit Dial Int        ISSN: 0896-8608            Impact factor:   1.756


  20 in total

1.  Rates and probabilities in economic modelling: transformation, translation and appropriate application.

Authors:  Rachael L Fleurence; Christopher S Hollenbeak
Journal:  Pharmacoeconomics       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 4.981

2.  Gaining efficiencies: resources and demand for dialysis around the globe.

Authors:  Nancy Neil; David R Walker; Ricardo Sesso; Juan Carlos Blackburn; Elizabeth A Tschosik; Vito Sciaraffia; Fernando García-Contreras; Dimitrie Capsa; Samir K Bhattacharyya
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2008-08-01       Impact factor: 5.725

3.  Central venous catheter outcomes in nocturnal hemodialysis.

Authors:  J Perl; C E Lok; C T Chan
Journal:  Kidney Int       Date:  2006-08-16       Impact factor: 10.612

4.  Patient education and access of ESRD patients to renal replacement therapies beyond in-center hemodialysis.

Authors:  Rajnish Mehrotra; Douglas Marsh; Edward Vonesh; Vickie Peters; Allen Nissenson
Journal:  Kidney Int       Date:  2005-07       Impact factor: 10.612

5.  What do American nephologists think about dialysis modality selection? .

Authors:  D C Mendelssohn; S R Mullaney; B Jung; P G Blake; R L Mehta
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2001-01       Impact factor: 8.860

6.  Prevalence of chronic kidney disease in the United States.

Authors:  Josef Coresh; Elizabeth Selvin; Lesley A Stevens; Jane Manzi; John W Kusek; Paul Eggers; Frederick Van Lente; Andrew S Levey
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2007-11-07       Impact factor: 56.272

7.  The financial implications for Medicare of greater use of peritoneal dialysis.

Authors:  Nancy Neil; Steven Guest; Leslie Wong; Gary Inglese; Samir K Bhattacharyya; Todd Gehr; David R Walker; Thomas Golper
Journal:  Clin Ther       Date:  2009-04       Impact factor: 3.393

8.  The cost-effectiveness of increasing kidney transplantation and home-based dialysis.

Authors:  Kirsten Howard; Glenn Salkeld; Sarah White; Stephen McDonald; Steve Chadban; Jonathan C Craig; Alan Cass
Journal:  Nephrology (Carlton)       Date:  2009-02       Impact factor: 2.506

9.  The initial impact of Medicare's new prospective payment system for kidney dialysis.

Authors:  Richard A Hirth; Marc N Turenne; John R C Wheeler; Tammie A Nahra; Kathryn K Sleeman; Wei Zhang; Joseph A Messana
Journal:  Am J Kidney Dis       Date:  2013-06-13       Impact factor: 8.860

10.  A prospective evaluation of renal replacement therapy modality eligibility.

Authors:  David C Mendelssohn; Salim K Mujais; Steven D Soroka; John Brouillette; Tomoko Takano; Paul E Barre; Bharati V Mittal; Ajay Singh; Catherine Firanek; Ken Story; Fredric O Finkelstein
Journal:  Nephrol Dial Transplant       Date:  2008-08-28       Impact factor: 5.992

View more
  8 in total

1.  Home Dialysis in the Prospective Payment System Era.

Authors:  Eugene Lin; Xingxing S Cheng; Kuo-Kai Chin; Talhah Zubair; Glenn M Chertow; Eran Bendavid; Jayanta Bhattacharya
Journal:  J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2017-05-10       Impact factor: 10.121

2.  Challenging Assumptions of Outcomes and Costs Comparing Peritoneal and Hemodialysis.

Authors:  Eugene Lin; Khristina I Lung; Glenn M Chertow; Jay Bhattacharya; Darius Lakdawalla
Journal:  Value Health       Date:  2021-07-30       Impact factor: 5.101

Review 3.  Cost Barriers to More Widespread Use of Peritoneal Dialysis in the United States.

Authors:  Elliot A Baerman; Jennifer Kaplan; Jenny I Shen; Wolfgang C Winkelmayer; Kevin F Erickson
Journal:  J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2022-03-21       Impact factor: 14.978

4.  Trends in Peritoneal Dialysis Use in the United States after Medicare Payment Reform.

Authors:  Caroline E Sloan; Cynthia J Coffman; Linda L Sanders; Matthew L Maciejewski; Shoou-Yih D Lee; Richard A Hirth; Virginia Wang
Journal:  Clin J Am Soc Nephrol       Date:  2019-11-21       Impact factor: 8.237

5.  Comparing Mortality of Peritoneal and Hemodialysis Patients in an Era of Medicare Payment Reform.

Authors:  Virginia Wang; Cynthia J Coffman; Linda L Sanders; Abby Hoffman; Caroline E Sloan; Shoou-Yih D Lee; Richard A Hirth; Matthew L Maciejewski
Journal:  Med Care       Date:  2021-02-01       Impact factor: 3.178

Review 6.  Effects of mixed provider payment systems and aligned cost sharing practices on expenditure growth management, efficiency, and equity: a structured review of the literature.

Authors:  Isabelle Feldhaus; Inke Mathauer
Journal:  BMC Health Serv Res       Date:  2018-12-27       Impact factor: 2.655

7.  Development and validation of an end stage kidney disease awareness survey: Item difficulty and discrimination indices.

Authors:  Tatiana Orozco; Emma Segal; Colin Hinkamp; Olanrewaju Olaoye; Popy Shell; Ashutosh M Shukla
Journal:  PLoS One       Date:  2022-09-09       Impact factor: 3.752

8.  Comparative effectiveness of home dialysis therapies: a matched cohort study.

Authors:  Gihad E Nesrallah; Lihua Li; Rita S Suri
Journal:  Can J Kidney Health Dis       Date:  2016-03-20
  8 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.