Harry Hill, James Fotheringham, Jessica Potts, Ivonne Solis-Trapala, Mark Lambie, Sarah Damery, Kerry Allen, Allan Wailoo, Iestyn Williams, Simon Davies
{"title":"The Cost-Effectiveness of Initiating Patients on Home Dialysis Compared with In-Centre Haemodialysis.","authors":"Harry Hill, James Fotheringham, Jessica Potts, Ivonne Solis-Trapala, Mark Lambie, Sarah Damery, Kerry Allen, Allan Wailoo, Iestyn Williams, Simon Davies","doi":"10.1007/s40258-025-00976-7","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Kidney failure can be treated at home with peritoneal dialysis or home haemodialysis. The combination of reduced staffing, transport and overhead costs and improved quality of life through treatment at home could make initiating dialysis at home highly cost-effective. The primary objective is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of initiating patients on home dialysis therapy (HDT) compared with in-centre haemodialysis (ICHD). The secondary objective is to determine the upper limit of net benefit from removing potential service barriers within dialysis centres that hinder the adoption of HDT.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>A multistate model using UK Renal Registry data combined with national survey data was developed to estimate patient and dialysis centre influences on dialysis treatment modality changes and the duration in each modality. These are used as inputs to a microsimulation estimating the lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and UK National Health Service (NHS) costs incurred for patients, the cost-effectiveness of HDT compared with ICHD and the differences in costs and health outcomes associated with removing specific barriers to HDT uptake.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Commencing HDT compared with ICHD resulted in 0.30 additional QALYs and saved Great British (GB) £15,272. HDT has an 82% probability of being cost-effective. Implementing quality-improvement initiatives and alleviating stresses on staff capacity are identified as influential in the multistate model. Addressing these led to QALY gains of 0.22 and 0.08 and cost increases of GB £10,059 and GB £5127 from an increase of life years lived of 0.54 and 0.22, respectively.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Initiating patients on HDT is cost-effective compared with ICHD. Alleviating stresses on staff capacity and implementing quality improvement initiatives in dialysis centres leads to health improvements, although these changes are not cost-effective owing to the associated increase in healthcare costs.</p>","PeriodicalId":8065,"journal":{"name":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.1000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Health Economics and Health Policy","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s40258-025-00976-7","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ECONOMICS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objectives: Kidney failure can be treated at home with peritoneal dialysis or home haemodialysis. The combination of reduced staffing, transport and overhead costs and improved quality of life through treatment at home could make initiating dialysis at home highly cost-effective. The primary objective is to estimate the cost-effectiveness of initiating patients on home dialysis therapy (HDT) compared with in-centre haemodialysis (ICHD). The secondary objective is to determine the upper limit of net benefit from removing potential service barriers within dialysis centres that hinder the adoption of HDT.
Method: A multistate model using UK Renal Registry data combined with national survey data was developed to estimate patient and dialysis centre influences on dialysis treatment modality changes and the duration in each modality. These are used as inputs to a microsimulation estimating the lifetime quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) and UK National Health Service (NHS) costs incurred for patients, the cost-effectiveness of HDT compared with ICHD and the differences in costs and health outcomes associated with removing specific barriers to HDT uptake.
Results: Commencing HDT compared with ICHD resulted in 0.30 additional QALYs and saved Great British (GB) £15,272. HDT has an 82% probability of being cost-effective. Implementing quality-improvement initiatives and alleviating stresses on staff capacity are identified as influential in the multistate model. Addressing these led to QALY gains of 0.22 and 0.08 and cost increases of GB £10,059 and GB £5127 from an increase of life years lived of 0.54 and 0.22, respectively.
Conclusions: Initiating patients on HDT is cost-effective compared with ICHD. Alleviating stresses on staff capacity and implementing quality improvement initiatives in dialysis centres leads to health improvements, although these changes are not cost-effective owing to the associated increase in healthcare costs.
期刊介绍：
Applied Health Economics and Health Policy provides timely publication of cutting-edge research and expert opinion from this increasingly important field, making it a vital resource for payers, providers and researchers alike. The journal includes high quality economic research and reviews of all aspects of healthcare from various perspectives and countries, designed to communicate the latest applied information in health economics and health policy.
While emphasis is placed on information with practical applications, a strong basis of underlying scientific rigor is maintained.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
