IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/aphecp/v14y2016i2d10.1007_s40258-015-0212-3.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

The Cost Effectiveness of High-Dose versus Conventional Haemodialysis: a Systematic Review

Author

Listed:
  • S. Laplante

    (Baxter Healthcare Corporation)

  • F. X. Liu

    (Baxter Healthcare Corporation)

  • B. Culleton

    (Baxter Healthcare Corporation)

  • A. Bernardo

    (Baxter Healthcare Corporation)

  • Denise King

    (Abacus International)

  • P. Hudson

    (Abacus International)

Abstract

Background End-stage renal disease (ESRD) is fatal if untreated. In the absence of transplant, approximately 50 % of dialysis patients die within 5 years. Although more frequent and/or longer haemodialysis (high-dose HD) improves survival, this regimen may add to the burden on dialysis services and healthcare costs. This systematic review summarised the cost effectiveness of high-dose HD compared with conventional HD. Methods English language publications reporting the cost-utility/effectiveness of high-dose HD in adults with ESRD were identified via a search of MEDLINE, Embase, and the Cochrane Library. Publications comparing any form of high-dose HD with conventional HD were reviewed. Results Seven publications (published between 2003 and 2014) reporting cost-utility analyses from the public healthcare payer perspective were identified. High-dose HD in-centre was compared with in-centre conventional HD in one US model; all other analyses (UK, Canada) compared high-dose HD at home with in-centre conventional HD (n = 5) or in-centre/home conventional HD (n = 1). The time horizon varied from one year to lifetime. Similar survival for high-dose HD and conventional HD was assumed, with the impact of higher survival only assessed in the sensitivity analyses of three models. High-dose HD at home was found to be cost effective compared with conventional HD in all six analyses. The analysis comparing high-dose HD in-centre with conventional in-centre HD produced an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio generally acceptable for the USA, but not for Europe, Canada or Australia. Conclusion High-dose HD can be cost effective when performed at home. Future analyses assuming survival benefits for high-dose HD compared with conventional HD are needed.

Suggested Citation

  • S. Laplante & F. X. Liu & B. Culleton & A. Bernardo & Denise King & P. Hudson, 2016. "The Cost Effectiveness of High-Dose versus Conventional Haemodialysis: a Systematic Review," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 14(2), pages 185-193, April.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:14:y:2016:i:2:d:10.1007_s40258-015-0212-3
    DOI: 10.1007/s40258-015-0212-3
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40258-015-0212-3
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40258-015-0212-3?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Takeru Shiroiwa & Yoon‐Kyoung Sung & Takashi Fukuda & Hui‐Chu Lang & Sang‐Cheol Bae & Kiichiro Tsutani, 2010. "International survey on willingness‐to‐pay (WTP) for one additional QALY gained: what is the threshold of cost effectiveness?," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 19(4), pages 422-437, April.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Suzanne Laplante & Frank X. Liu & Bruce Culleton & Angelito Bernardo & Denise King & Pollyanna Hudson, 2016. "Authors’ Reply to Gandjour “The Cost Effectiveness of High-Dose Versus Conventional Haemodialysis: A Systematic Review”," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 14(6), pages 731-732, December.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Fischer, Barbara & Telser, Harry & Zweifel, Peter & von Wyl, Viktor & Beck, Konstantin & Weber, Andreas, 2023. "The value of a QALY towards the end of life and its determinants: Experimental evidence," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 326(C).
    2. Maria Rubio-Valera & María Teresa Peñarrubia-María & Maria Iglesias-González & Martin Knapp & Paul McCrone & Marta Roig & Ramón Sabes-Figuera & Juan V. Luciano & Juan M. Mendive & Ana Gabriela Murruga, 2019. "Cost-effectiveness of antidepressants versus active monitoring for mild-to-moderate major depressive disorder: a multisite non-randomized-controlled trial in primary care (INFAP study)," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 20(5), pages 703-713, July.
    3. Thomas Grochtdreis & Hans-Helmut König & Alexander Dobruschkin & Gunhild von Amsberg & Judith Dams, 2018. "Cost-effectiveness analyses and cost analyses in castration-resistant prostate cancer: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(12), pages 1-25, December.
    4. Vincent T Janmaat & Marco J Bruno & Suzanne Polinder & Sylvie Lorenzen & Florian Lordick & Maikel P Peppelenbosch & Manon C W Spaander, 2016. "Cost-Effectiveness of Cetuximab for Advanced Esophageal Squamous Cell Carcinoma," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-10, April.
    5. Ryen, Linda & Svensson, Mikael, 2014. "The Willingness to Pay for a QALY: a Review of the Empirical Literature," Karlstad University Working Papers in Economics 12, Karlstad University, Department of Economics.
    6. Claudia Schulz & Gisela Büchele & Raphael S. Peter & Dietrich Rothenbacher & Christian Brettschneider & Ulrich C. Liener & Clemens Becker & Kilian Rapp & Hans-Helmut König, 2021. "Health-economic evaluation of collaborative orthogeriatric care for patients with a hip fracture in Germany: a retrospective cohort study using health and long-term care insurance claims data," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 22(6), pages 873-885, August.
    7. Jorge Barros-Garcia-Imhof & Andrés Jiménez-Alfonso & Inés Gómez-Acebo & María Fernández-Ortiz & Jéssica Alonso-Molero & Javier Llorca & Alejandro Gonzalez-Castro & Trinidad Dierssen-Sotos, 2022. "Perception of Medical Students on the Need for End-of-Life Care: A Q-Methodology Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(13), pages 1-16, June.
    8. David Brain & Ruth Tulleners & Xing Lee & Qinglu Cheng & Nicholas Graves & Rosana Pacella, 2019. "Cost-effectiveness analysis of an innovative model of care for chronic wounds patients," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(3), pages 1-13, March.
    9. Hoa‐Thi‐Minh Nguyen & Tom Kompas & Roslyn I. Hickson, 2014. "Aid and the Control of Tuberculosis in Papua New Guinea: Is Australia's Assistance Cost‐Effective?," Asia and the Pacific Policy Studies, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 1(2), pages 364-378, May.
    10. Andrew Gallagher & Violetta Shersher & Duncan Mortimer & Helen Truby & Terry Haines, 2023. "The Cost-Effectiveness of Adjunctive Lifestyle Interventions for the Management of Cancer: A Systematic Review," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 21(2), pages 225-242, March.
    11. Najme Moradi & Arash Rashidian & Shirin Nosratnejad & Alireza Olyaeemanesh & Marzieh Zanganeh & Leila Zarei, 2019. "The Worth of a Quality-Adjusted Life-Year in Patients with Diabetes: An Investigation Study using a Willingness-to-Pay Method," PharmacoEconomics - Open, Springer, vol. 3(3), pages 311-319, September.
    12. Samuel Herzog & Marian Shanahan & Peter Grimison & Anh Tran & Nicole Wong & Nicholas Lintzeris & John Simes & Martin Stockler & Rachael L. Morton, 2018. "Systematic Review of the Costs and Benefits of Prescribed Cannabis-Based Medicines for the Management of Chronic Illness: Lessons from Multiple Sclerosis," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 36(1), pages 67-78, January.
    13. Dastan Bamwesigye, 2023. "Willingness to Pay for Alternative Energies in Uganda: Energy Needs and Policy Instruments towards Zero Deforestation 2030 and Climate Change," Energies, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-21, January.
    14. Susan Geertshuis & Otto Krickl, 2013. "Value Judgements and Continuing Education," International Journal of Management, Knowledge and Learning, International School for Social and Business Studies, Celje, Slovenia, vol. 2(1), pages 123-141.
    15. Henrik Andersson & James K. Hammitt & Kristian Sundström, 2015. "Willingness to Pay and QALYs: What Can We Learn about Valuing Foodborne Risk?," Journal of Agricultural Economics, Wiley Blackwell, vol. 66(3), pages 727-752, September.
    16. Shafie, A.A. & Hassali, M.A., 2013. "Willingness to pay for voluntary community-based health insurance: Findings from an exploratory study in the state of Penang, Malaysia," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 96(C), pages 272-276.
    17. Akazawa, Manabu & Yongue, Julia & Ikeda, Shunya & Satoh, Toshihiko, 2014. "Considering economic analyses in the revision of the preventive vaccination law: A new direction for health policy-making in Japan?," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 118(1), pages 127-134.
    18. Beth Woods & Paul Revill & Mark Sculpher & Karl Claxton, 2015. "Country-level cost-effectiveness thresholds: initial estimates and the need for further research," Working Papers 109cherp, Centre for Health Economics, University of York.
    19. Jun Li & Benjamin H K Yip & Chichiu Leung & Wankyo Chung & Kin On Kwok & Emily Y Y Chan & Engkiong Yeoh & Puihong Chung, 2018. "Screening for latent and active tuberculosis infection in the elderly at admission to residential care homes: A cost-effectiveness analysis in an intermediate disease burden area," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 13(1), pages 1-18, January.
    20. Ronald Wielage & Megha Bansal & J. Andrews & Robert Klein & Michael Happich, 2013. "Cost-Utility Analysis of Duloxetine in Osteoarthritis: A US Private Payer Perspective," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 11(3), pages 219-236, June.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:aphecp:v:14:y:2016:i:2:d:10.1007_s40258-015-0212-3. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.