Tomoyuki Takura1, Makoto Hiramatsu2, Hidetomo Nakamoto3, Takahiro Kuragano4, Jun Minakuchi5, Hironori Ishida6, Masaaki Nakayama7, Susumu Takahashi8, Hideki Kawanishi9. 1. Department of Health Economy and Society Policy, Graduate School of Medicine, The University of Tokyo, Tokyo, Japan. 2. Outpatient Center Hospital, Okayama Saiseikai General Hospital, Okayama City, Okayama, Japan. 3. General Intrarenal Medicine, Saitama Medical University, Saitama, Japan. 4. Internal Medicine (Nephrology and Dialysis), Hyogo College of Medicine, Nishinomiya City, Hyogo, Japan. 5. Nephrology (Endocrinology), Kawashima Hospital, Tokushima City, Tokushima, Japan. 6. Urology, Kitasaito Hospital, Asahikawa City, Hokaido, Japan. 7. Kidney Center, St. Luke's International Hospital, Tokyo, Japan. 8. Head Office, International Kidney Evaluation Association Japan, Tokyo, Japan. 9. Artificial Organs and Surgery, Tsuchiya General Hospital, Hiroshima City, Hiroshima, Japan.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: In Japan, the medical expenditures associated with dialysis have garnered considerable interest; however, a cost-effectiveness evaluation of peritoneal dialysis (PD) is yet to be evaluated. In particular, the health economics of the "PD first" concept, which can be advantageous for clinical practice and healthcare systems, must be evaluated. METHODS: This multicenter study investigated the cost-effectiveness of PD. The major effectiveness indicator was quality-adjusted life year (QALY), with a preference-based utility value based on renal function, and the cost indicator was the amount billed for a medical service at each medical institution for qualifying illnesses. In comparison with hemodialysis (HD), a baseline analysis of PD therapy was conducted using a cost-utility analysis (CUA). Continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD) and automated PD (APD) were compared based on the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) and propensity score (PS) with a limited number of cases. RESULTS: The mean duration since the start of PD was 35.0±14.4 months. The overall CUA for PD (179 patients) was USD 55,019/QALY, which was more cost effective (USD/monthly utility) compared with that for HD for 12-24 months (4,367 vs. 4,852; p<0.05). The CUA reported significantly better results in the glomerulonephritis group than in the other diseases, and the baseline CUA was significantly age sensitive. The utility score was higher in the APD group (mean age, 70.1±3.5 years) than in the CAPD group (mean age, 70.6±4.2 years; 0.987 vs. 0.860; p<0.05, 9 patients). Compared with CAPD, APD had an overall ICUR of USD 126,034/QALY. CONCLUSION: The cost-effectiveness of PD was potentially good in the elderly and in patients on dialysis for <24 months. Therefore, the prevalence of PD may influence the public health insurance system, particularly when applying the "PD first" concept.
BACKGROUND: In Japan, the medical expenditures associated with dialysis have garnered considerable interest; however, a cost-effectiveness evaluation of peritoneal dialysis (PD) is yet to be evaluated. In particular, the health economics of the "PD first" concept, which can be advantageous for clinical practice and healthcare systems, must be evaluated. METHODS: This multicenter study investigated the cost-effectiveness of PD. The major effectiveness indicator was quality-adjusted life year (QALY), with a preference-based utility value based on renal function, and the cost indicator was the amount billed for a medical service at each medical institution for qualifying illnesses. In comparison with hemodialysis (HD), a baseline analysis of PD therapy was conducted using a cost-utility analysis (CUA). Continuous ambulatory PD (CAPD) and automated PD (APD) were compared based on the incremental cost-utility ratio (ICUR) and propensity score (PS) with a limited number of cases. RESULTS: The mean duration since the start of PD was 35.0±14.4 months. The overall CUA for PD (179 patients) was USD 55,019/QALY, which was more cost effective (USD/monthly utility) compared with that for HD for 12-24 months (4,367 vs. 4,852; p<0.05). The CUA reported significantly better results in the glomerulonephritis group than in the other diseases, and the baseline CUA was significantly age sensitive. The utility score was higher in the APD group (mean age, 70.1±3.5 years) than in the CAPD group (mean age, 70.6±4.2 years; 0.987 vs. 0.860; p<0.05, 9 patients). Compared with CAPD, APD had an overall ICUR of USD 126,034/QALY. CONCLUSION: The cost-effectiveness of PD was potentially good in the elderly and in patients on dialysis for <24 months. Therefore, the prevalence of PD may influence the public health insurance system, particularly when applying the "PD first" concept.
Keywords:
automated peritoneal dialysis; cost-utility analysis; diabetic nephropathy; medical service reimbursement; propensity score; quality-adjusted life year
Authors: Maarten A M Jansen; Augustinus A M Hart; Johanna C Korevaar; Friedo W Dekker; Elisabeth W Boeschoten; Raymond T Krediet Journal: Kidney Int Date: 2002-09 Impact factor: 10.612
Authors: Christoph Wanner; Vera Krane; Winfried März; Manfred Olschewski; Johannes F E Mann; Günther Ruf; Eberhard Ritz Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-07-21 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Michal L Melamed; Joseph A Eustace; Laura C Plantinga; Bernard G Jaar; Nancy E Fink; Rulan S Parekh; Josef Coresh; Zan Yang; Tom Cantor; Neil R Powe Journal: Nephrol Dial Transplant Date: 2007-12-08 Impact factor: 5.992
Authors: Bengt C Fellström; Alan G Jardine; Roland E Schmieder; Hallvard Holdaas; Kym Bannister; Jaap Beutler; Dong-Wan Chae; Alejandro Chevaile; Stuart M Cobbe; Carola Grönhagen-Riska; José J De Lima; Robert Lins; Gert Mayer; Alan W McMahon; Hans-Henrik Parving; Giuseppe Remuzzi; Ola Samuelsson; Sandor Sonkodi; D Sci; Gultekin Süleymanlar; Dimitrios Tsakiris; Vladimir Tesar; Vasil Todorov; Andrzej Wiecek; Rudolf P Wüthrich; Mattis Gottlow; Eva Johnsson; Faiez Zannad Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2009-03-30 Impact factor: 91.245