Search

We have examined trends in hemodialysis practice from August 2010 to August 2011, a time frame spanning the implementation of the bundled PPS, a major ESA label change by the FDA, and announcements from CMS on the proposed and final rules for the first year of the Quality Incentive Program (QIP) plus the proposed rules for the second and third years of the QIP. Although many hemodialysis practices have remained stable during this 1-year time period, substantial changes have been seen. These include a decline in epoetin dose and hemoglobin levels, an increase in IV iron use and serum ferritin levels, and an increase in PTH levels. The rates of decline in hemoglobin and epoetin dosing levels were greatest in the 2 months after the ESA label change in June 2011. Trends in anemia care in ensuing months, with more follow-up time after the label change, will be of great interest. In view of declining hemoglobin levels, a mechanism for comprehensive monitoring of transfusion rates is warranted to understand this important aspect of care for hemodialysis patients. Regarding clinical outcomes, no trend in all-cause mortality has been evident during this 1-year time period. Additional follow-up is warranted to understand if findings reported here persist over time, and require confirmation with national data as these become available. Trends in clinical care may not necessarily affect patient outcomes, and careful evaluation is required to understand effects on patient outcomes.

A new initiative of the United States (U.S.) Dialysis Outcomes and Practice Patterns Study (DOPPS), the DOPPS Practice Monitor (DPM) provides up-to-date data and analyses to monitor trends in dialysis practice during implementation of the new Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) Prospective Payment System (PPS; 2011–2014). We review DPM rationale, design, sampling approach, analytic methods, and facility sample characteristics. Using stratified random sampling, the sample of ~145 U.S. facilities provides results representative nationally and by facility type (dialysis organization size, rural/urban, free-standing/hospital-based), achieving coverage similar to the CMS sample frame at average values and tails of the distributions for key measures and patient characteristics. A publicly available Web report (www.dopps.org/DPM) provides detailed trends including demographic, comorbidity, and dialysis data, medications, vascular access, and quality of life. Findings are updated every 4 months and lagged only 3–4 months. Baseline data are from mid-2010, prior to the new PPS. In sum, the DPM provides timely, representative data to monitor the effects of the expanded PPS on dialysis practice. Findings can serve as an early warning system for possible adverse effects on clinical care and as a basis for community outreach, editorial comment, and informed advocacy.

Background: Racial disparities in health care are widespread in the United States. Identifying contributing factors may improve care for underserved minorities. To the extent that differential utilization of services, based on need or biological effect, contributes to outcome disparities, prospective payment systems may require inclusion of race to minimize these adverse effects. This research determines whether costs associated with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) care varied by race and whether this variance affected payments to dialysis facilities. Study Design: We compared the classification of race across Medicare databases and investigated differences in cost of care for long-term dialysis patients by race. Setting & Participants: Medicare ESRD database including 890,776 patient-years in 2004-2006. Predictors: Patient race and ethnicity. Outcomes: Costs associated with ESRD care and estimated payments to dialysis facilities under a prospective payment system. Results: There were inconsistencies in race and ethnicity classification; however, there was significant agreement for classification of black and nonblack race across databases. In predictive models evaluating the cost of outpatient dialysis care for Medicare patients, race is a significant predictor of cost, particularly for cost of separately billed injectable medications used in dialysis. Overall, black patients had 9% higher costs than nonblack patients. In a model that did not adjust for race, other patient characteristics accounted for only 31% of this difference. Limitations: Lack of information about biological causes of the link between race and cost. Conclusions: There is a significant racial difference in the cost of providing dialysis care that is not accounted for by other factors that may be used to adjust payments. This difference has the potential to affect the delivery of care to certain populations. Of note, inclusion of race into a prospective payment system will require better understanding of biological differences in bone and anemia outcomes, as well as effects of inclusion on self-reported race. Am J Kidney Dis 56:928-936. © 2010 by the National Kidney Foundation, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Background Recent publications suggest that increased mortality is associated with high hematocrit targets in erythropoietin-stimulating agent–treated patients with chronic kidney disease. We aim to further inform the debate about optimal hematocrit targets, advancing the hypothesis that the current hematocrit target may not optimize the survival of patients with end-stage renal disease. Study Design Cross-sectional observational study. Setting & Participants Medicare dialysis patients from 2002 to 2004 (n = 393,967). Factors Quarterly average hematocrit and erythropoietin alfa (EPO) dose. Outcomes Mortality hazard ratios from time-dependent Cox proportional hazard models, adjusting for comorbidities. Results N = 2,712,197 patient-facility quarters. During the study, 100,086 deaths were identified. Percentages of patient quarters within each hematocrit category: hematocrit less than 27% (2.0%), 27% to 28.49% (1.7%), 28.5% to 29.9% (2.9%), 30% to 31.49% (5.2%), 31.5% to 32.99% (9.0%), 33% to 34.49% (14.9%), 34.5% to 35.99% (19.2%), 36% to 37.49% (18.0%), 37.5% to 38.99% (12.0%), 39% to 40.49% (6.4%), 40.5% to 41.99% (3.0%), and 42% or greater (3.1%). Mortality hazard ratios from the fully adjusted model: hematocrit less than 27% (3.11), 27% to 28.49% (2.60), 28.5% to 29.9% (2.14), 30% to 31.49% (1.80), 31.5% to 32.99% (1.44), 33% to 34.49% (1.17), 34.5% to 35.99% (reference), 36% to 37.49% (0.98), 37.5% to 38.99% (1.01), 39% to 40.49% (1.13), 40.5% to 41.99% (1.32), and 42% or greater (1.57). Limitations First, potential confounding by indication related to associations between underlying illness and mortality, anemia, and EPO responsiveness. Second, Medicare claims data reflect a range of conditions and degrees of severity not easily translated into the clinical context. Third, for Medicare claims, EPO reporting is not required if EPO is not billed. Greater than 95% of "missing hematocrit" quarters are "EPO = 0" patient quarters. Interpretation of results for the missing hematocrit and EPO=0 use categories is complicated by data source limitations. Conclusions We show an association between mortality and low hematocrit in dialysis patients, in part reflecting the presence of comorbidities. We also show an association between increased mortality and high hematocrit. Additional interventional trials should be undertaken to better define the optimal target for anemia management in patients with end-stage renal disease, with careful prospective identification of underlying comorbidities and clinical factors contributing to high erythropoietin-stimulating agent requirement.

In April 2005, Medicare began adjusting payments to dialysis providers for composite-rate services for a limited set of patient characteristics, including age, body surface area, and low body mass index. We present analyses intended to help the end-stage renal disease community understand the empirical reasons behind the new composite-rate basic case-mix adjustment. The U-shaped relationship between age and composite-rate cost that is reflected in the basic case-mix adjustment has generated significant discussion within the end-stage renal disease community. Whereas greater costs among older patients are consistent with conventional wisdom, greater costs among younger patients are caused in part by more skipped sessions and a greater incidence of certain costly comorbidities. Longer treatment times for patients with a greater body surface area combined with the largely fixed cost structure of dialysis facilities explains much of the greater cost for larger patients. The basic case-mix adjustment reflects an initial and partial adjustment for the cost of providing composite-rate services.

There is an ongoing discussion in the renal community about how to monitor the treatment of hemodialysis patients in the United States. Comparison of the US patient experience to that of other countries with populations of similar heath status is one way to assess treatment. Another technique involves examining the level of dialysis therapy US patients receive. This paper reviews recent studies which found that the United States has higher mortality than both Japan and Europe and provides additional information as to why those comparisons might be underestimating the mortality differences. We also examine the data on the level of dialysis US patients receive, both as a prescription and as delivered care. We conclude that US patients receive less hemodialysis therapy than their European and Japanese counterparts, and that in general US patients are not receiving the level of dialysis they were prescribed. These factors are correlated with an increased mortality among US hemodialysis patients.