Employment Status of Patients with ESRD and the Subsequent treatment modalities in the United State

J. Sullivan
{"title":"Employment Status of Patients with ESRD and the Subsequent treatment modalities in the United State","authors":"J. Sullivan","doi":"10.32474/JUNS.2019.01.000119","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"End Stage Renal Disease impacts the lives of over 725,000 Americans and their families. In 1972, despite the cost of supporting a rapidly growing chronic condition at the time, the United States initiated a system whereby everyone would be treated that qualifies for social security benefits, after a waiting period of three years (Medicare Secondary Payer was slowly extended over the years to 36 months after diagnosis as it currently stands), regardless of age, providing the platform for the debate of a potential nationalized health care system that currently seems to be in a period of uncertainty. However, over three decades through significant consolidation, the treatment of dialysis via two large provider chains (one fully integrated) have directed patients to hemodialysis in the out-patient setting without considering the technological or clinical benefits of home hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis [1,2]. This may have occurred as a result of medical training although the overall system is structured more on a corporate basis today with new nephrologists joining practices that are already contracted with a large chain through medical directorships. That said, patients seem to be directed towards outpatient hemo-dialysis over other options such as home hemo-dialysis and peritoneal dialysis. The result has created an economic and medical system that has shifted toward what is perceived as the lowest cost of care without a consideration for other treatment modalities that promote a better quality of life for the patient as well as greater monetary benefits for the United States Federal Government. From a pure economic standpoint, profitability for providers is in the out-patient clinics despite the initial investment of $1-2 million to build out a clinic via fixed asset utilization and the variable cost of peritoneal dialysis as well as the supply costs needed for home hemodialysis. In other words, for these two treatment modalities, the margin, if any, is built purely into the treatment. Margins can be enhanced through high utilization of in-center facilities via leveraging the staff and fixed costs while using economies of scale to reduce variable costs such as dialyzers and lines combined with a favorable commercial patient base. With the focus on this modality, there are economic impacts based on decisions that increase the overall expenditures to the entire system that can easily be avoided or reduced.","PeriodicalId":17651,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Urology & Nephrology Studies","volume":"31 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-03-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Urology & Nephrology Studies","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.32474/JUNS.2019.01.000119","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

End Stage Renal Disease impacts the lives of over 725,000 Americans and their families. In 1972, despite the cost of supporting a rapidly growing chronic condition at the time, the United States initiated a system whereby everyone would be treated that qualifies for social security benefits, after a waiting period of three years (Medicare Secondary Payer was slowly extended over the years to 36 months after diagnosis as it currently stands), regardless of age, providing the platform for the debate of a potential nationalized health care system that currently seems to be in a period of uncertainty. However, over three decades through significant consolidation, the treatment of dialysis via two large provider chains (one fully integrated) have directed patients to hemodialysis in the out-patient setting without considering the technological or clinical benefits of home hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis [1,2]. This may have occurred as a result of medical training although the overall system is structured more on a corporate basis today with new nephrologists joining practices that are already contracted with a large chain through medical directorships. That said, patients seem to be directed towards outpatient hemo-dialysis over other options such as home hemo-dialysis and peritoneal dialysis. The result has created an economic and medical system that has shifted toward what is perceived as the lowest cost of care without a consideration for other treatment modalities that promote a better quality of life for the patient as well as greater monetary benefits for the United States Federal Government. From a pure economic standpoint, profitability for providers is in the out-patient clinics despite the initial investment of $1-2 million to build out a clinic via fixed asset utilization and the variable cost of peritoneal dialysis as well as the supply costs needed for home hemodialysis. In other words, for these two treatment modalities, the margin, if any, is built purely into the treatment. Margins can be enhanced through high utilization of in-center facilities via leveraging the staff and fixed costs while using economies of scale to reduce variable costs such as dialyzers and lines combined with a favorable commercial patient base. With the focus on this modality, there are economic impacts based on decisions that increase the overall expenditures to the entire system that can easily be avoided or reduced.
美国ESRD患者的就业状况及后续治疗方式
终末期肾病影响着超过72.5万美国人及其家人的生活。1972年,尽管当时支持快速增长的慢性疾病的费用很高,但美国启动了一项制度,在经过三年的等待期(医疗保险第二支付人多年来慢慢延长到目前诊断后的36个月)后,无论年龄大小,每个人都可以接受有资格享受社会保障福利的治疗。为目前似乎处于不确定时期的潜在国有化医疗保健系统的辩论提供了平台。然而,经过三十年的显著整合,透析治疗通过两个大型供应商链(一个完全整合)引导患者在门诊进行血液透析,而没有考虑家庭血液透析或腹膜透析的技术或临床益处[1,2]。这可能是医疗培训的结果,尽管今天整个系统的结构更多地以企业为基础,新的肾病学家加入已经通过医疗董事与大型连锁签约的实践。也就是说,患者似乎更倾向于门诊血液透析而不是其他选择,如家庭血液透析和腹膜透析。其结果是创造了一个经济和医疗系统,它转向了被认为是最低成本的护理,而没有考虑到其他治疗方式,这些治疗方式可以提高患者的生活质量,并为美国联邦政府带来更大的经济利益。从纯粹的经济角度来看,尽管通过固定资产利用和腹膜透析的可变成本以及家庭血液透析所需的供应成本,建立诊所的初始投资为1- 200万美元,但提供者的盈利能力在于门诊诊所。换句话说,对于这两种治疗方式,边际,如果有的话,是完全建立在治疗。通过充分利用员工和固定成本,提高中心设施的利用率,同时利用规模经济来降低诸如透析器和生产线等可变成本,并结合有利的商业患者基础,可以提高利润率。随着对这种模式的关注,基于增加整个系统总体支出的决策的经济影响可以很容易地避免或减少。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信