Cost-Effectiveness of High Dose Hemodialysis in Comparison to Conventional In-Center Hemodialysis in the Netherlands.
In the Netherlands, the current standard of care for treating patients with end-stage renal disease is three sessions of in-center hemodialysis (conventional ICHD). However, the literature indicates that high dose hemodialysis (high dose HD) may provide better health outcome such as survival and quality of life. The objective of this study was to determine the cost-effectiveness of high dose HD, both in-center and at home, in comparison to conventional ICHD from a Dutch payer's perspective over a 5 year period. Additionally, the cost-effectiveness of conventional HD at home in comparison to conventional ICHD will be analysed.



A Markov model was developed assuming 28-day treatment cycles and was populated with data from Dutch and international renal registries, official tariffs and medical literature. Univariable and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to test the robustness of the results.



Using publicly available tariffs from the Dutch Healthcare Authority (Nederlandse Zorgautoriteit) of 2015, doing high dose ICHD instead of conventional ICHD shows an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER) of €275,747 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. In contrast, the ICER of high dose HD at home in comparison to conventional ICHD is €3248 per gained QALY. The final analysis shows that conventional HD at home is less costly per patient (-€3063) than conventional ICHD and results in health benefit improvement (+0.249 QALYs), and is therefore regarded as cost saving.



Treating dialysis patients with conventional HD at home shows to be cost saving in comparison to conventional ICHD. However, the magnitude of clinical benefit of high dose HD at home is over two times greater than the clinical benefit of conventional HD at home. According to our analysis, from a payer's perspective, high dose HD should be offered as a home therapy to obtain its clinical benefits in a cost-effective manner. Future research should consider our findings alongside societal factors, such as patient preference, monitoring cost for the home patient, productivity loss and capacity.



Baxter BV, The Netherlands.
Baxter BV (Netherlands), Utrecht, The Netherlands. anna_trisia_beby@baxter.com.
Anna Trisia
0000-0001-5743-4270
AT
Beby
Department of Nephrology, Jessa Ziekenhuis Hasselt, Hasselt, Belgium.
Tom
T
Cornelis
Baxter BV (Netherlands), Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Raymund
R
Zinck
Baxter Healthcare Corporation, Deerfield, IL, USA.
Frank Xiaoqing
FX
Liu
D000554:Ambulatory Care Facilities / Q000191:economics / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D057186:Comparative Effectiveness Research; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D005260:Female; D006437:Hemodialysis, Home / Q000191:economics / Q000706:statistics & numerical data; D006801:Humans; D007676:Kidney Failure, Chronic / Q000191:economics / Q000401:mortality / Q000523:psychology / Q000628:therapy; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D009426:Netherlands / Q000453:epidemiology; D011788:Quality of Life; D019057:Quality-Adjusted Life Years; D006435:Renal Dialysis / Q000191:economics / Q000379:methods / Q000592:standards
Cost-effectiveness; End-stage renal disease; Hemodialysis; High dose hemodialysis; In-center hemodialysis; Netherlands; Urology