Search

Background: The aim of this study is to present average annual healthcare costs for Dutch renal replacement therapy (RRT) patients for 7 treatment modalities., Methods: Health insurance claims data from 2012-2014 were used. All patients with a 2014 claim for dialysis or kidney transplantation were selected. The RRT related and RRT unrelated average annual healthcare costs were analysed for 5 dialysis modalities (in-centre haemodialysis (CHD), home haemodialysis (HHD), continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD), automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) and multiple dialysis modalities in a year (Mix group)) and 2 transplant modalities (kidney from living and deceased donor, respectively)., Results: The total average annual healthcare costs in 2014 ranged from €77,566 (SD = €27,237) for CAPD patients to €105,833 (SD = €30,239) for patients in the Mix group. For all dialysis modalities, the vast majority (72-84%) of costs was RRT related. Patients on haemodialysis ≥4x/week had significantly higher average annual costs compared to those dialyzing 3x/week (Δ€19,122). Costs for kidney transplant recipients were €85,127 (SD = €39,679) in the year of transplantation and rapidly declined in the first and second year after successful transplantation (resp. €29,612 (SD = €34,099) and €15,018 (SD = €16,186)). Transplantation with a deceased donor kidney resulted in higher costs (€99,450, SD = €36,036)) in the year of transplantation compared to a living donor kidney transplantation (€73,376, SD = €38,666)., Conclusions: CAPD patients have the lowest costs compared to other dialysis modalities. Costs in the year of transplantation are 25% lower for patients with kidneys from living vs. deceased donor. After successful transplantation, annual costs decline substantially to a level that is approximately 14-19% of annual dialysis costs., Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

Background: The proportion of patients with advanced chronic kidney disease (CKD) initiating dialysis therapy at a higher glomerular filtration rate (GFR) has increased during the past decade. Recent data suggest that higher GFR may be associated with increased mortality., Study Design: A meta-analysis of cohort studies and trials., Setting & Population: Patients with advanced CKD., Selection Criteria for Studies: We performed a systematic literature search in MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, ClinicalTrials.gov, American Society of Nephrology abstracts, and bibliographies of retrieved articles to identify studies reporting on GFR at dialysis therapy initiation and mortality., Predictor: Estimated or calculated GFR at dialysis therapy initiation., Outcome: Pooled adjusted hazard ratio (HR) of continuous GFR for all-cause mortality., Results: 16 cohort studies and 1 randomized controlled trial were identified (n = 1,081,116). By meta-analysis restricted to 15 cohorts (n = 1,079,917), higher GFR at dialysis therapy initiation was associated with a higher pooled adjusted HR for all-cause mortality (1.04; 95% CI, 1.03-1.05; P < 0.001). However, there was significant heterogeneity (I(2) = 97%; P < 0.001). The association persisted among the 9 cohorts that adjusted analytically for nutritional covariates (HR, 1.03; 95% CI, 1.02-1.04; P < 0.001; residual I(2) = 97%). The highest mortality risk was observed in hemodialysis cohorts (HR, 1.05; 95% CI, 1.02-1.08; P < 0.001), whereas there was no association between GFR and mortality in peritoneal dialysis cohorts (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 0.99-1.08, P = 0.1; residual I(2) = 98%). Finally, higher GFR was associated with a lower mortality risk in cohorts that calculated GFR (HR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.71-0.91; P = 0.003), contrasting with a higher mortality risk in cohorts that estimated GFR (HR, 1.04; 95% CI, 1.03-1.05; P < 0.001; residual I(2) = 97%)., Limitations: Paucity of randomized controlled trials, different methods for determining GFR, and substantial heterogeneity., Conclusions: Higher estimated rather than calculated GFR at dialysis therapy initiation is associated with a higher mortality risk in patients with advanced CKD, independent of nutritional status. Although there was substantial heterogeneity of effect size estimates across studies, this observation requires further study., (Copyright © 2012 National Kidney Foundation, Inc. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: The mean age of patients starting dialysis increased over the years, as has the proportion of patients with diabetes mellitus, ischaemic heart disease, peripheral vascular disease (PVD), cerebrovascular disease (CD) and malignancy. We assessed dialysis modality choice within subgroups of patients with these comorbidities and in different age categories and subsequently evaluated the association between modality choice and patient survival in these subgroups., Methods: Seven European renal registries participating in the ERA-EDTA Registry provided data from 15,828 incident peritoneal dialysis (PD) and haemodialysis (HD) patients (1998-2006) with available comorbidity data. The likelihood to receive PD rather than HD was assessed with logistic regression and 3-year survival on PD versus HD was evaluated using Cox regression., Results: Besides large international variations in the likelihood to receive PD, we found that elderly patients and patients with PVD, CD, malignancy and multiple comorbidities were significantly less likely to receive PD than HD. Overall patients starting on PD had survival benefits [adjusted hazard ratio (HR(adj)) 0.82 (0.75-0.90)], especially patients without comorbidity [HR(adj) 0.65 (0.53-0.80)] or those with malignancy [HR(adj) 0.73 (0.56-0.94)]. In males, survival benefits of PD were independent of diabetic status. Conversely, diabetic females tended to have increased mortality risk on PD [HR(adj) 1.16 (0.93-1.44)], especially if they were >70 years [HR(adj) 1.55 (1.15-2.08)]., Conclusions: In general, modality choice was consistent with expected survival. However, elderly patients, non-diabetic patients and those with malignancy were less likely to receive PD, even though they had decreased mortality risk on PD. Also, although a survival benefit of PD was found for male patients without comorbidity, HD was just as likely to be the chosen dialysis modality as was PD for these patients.

Background This paper compares the most recent data on the incidence and prevalence of kidney replacement therapy (KRT), kidney transplantation rates, and mortality on KRT from Europe to those from the United States (US), including comparisons of treatment modalities (haemodialysis (HD), peritoneal dialysis (PD), and kidney transplantation (KTx)). Methods Data were derived from the annual reports of the European Renal Association (ERA) Registry and the United States Renal Data System (USRDS). The European data include information from national and regional renal registries providing the ERA Registry with individual patient data. Additional analyses were performed to present results for all participating European countries together. Results In 2021, the KRT incidence in the US (409.7 per million population (pmp)) was almost 3-fold higher than in Europe (144.4 pmp). Despite the substantial difference in KRT incidence, approximately the same proportion of patients initiated HD (Europe: 82%, US: 84%), PD (14%; 13%, respectively), or underwent pre-emptive KTx (4%; 3%, respectively). The KRT prevalence in the US (2436.1 pmp) was 2-fold higher than in Europe (1187.8 pmp). Within Europe, approximately half of all prevalent patients were living with a functioning graft (47%), while in the US, this was one third (32%). The number of kidney transplantations performed was almost twice as high in the US (77.0 pmp) compared to Europe (41.6 pmp). The mortality of patients receiving KRT was 1.6-fold higher in the US (157.3 per 1000 patient years) compared to Europe (98.7 per 1000 patient years). Conclusions The US had a much higher KRT incidence, prevalence, and mortality compared to Europe, and despite a higher kidney transplantation rate, a lower proportion of prevalent patients with a functioning graft. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Employment is important for the quality of life and financial security of patients of working age receiving kidney replacement therapy (KRT). We aimed to examine self-reported work status and general, physical and mental work ability and to determine associations between demographic, disease-related, work-related and macroeconomic factors and employment.  Methods Europeans from 37 countries, ages 19–65 years, treated with dialysis or kidney transplantation, filled out the web-based or paper-based cross-sectional EDITH kidney patient survey between November 2017 and January 2019. We performed descriptive analyses and multivariable generalized logistic mixed models. Results Of the 3544 patients, 36.5% were employed and working [25.8% of dialysis patients, 53.9% of kidney transplant recipients (KTRs)]. The mean general work ability was 5.5 out of 10 (dialysis: 4.8, KTRs: 6.5). Non-working patients (all: 4.1, dialysis: 3.9, KTRs: 4.7) scored lower than working patients (all: 7.7, dialysis 7.3, KTRs: 8.0). Working dialysis patients scored lower on physical and mental work ability (7.1 and 8.1) than working KTRs (8.0 and 8.4; P < 0.001). Impaired physical work ability (42.7%) was more prevalent than impaired mental work ability (26.7%). Male sex, age 40–49 years, higher education, home dialysis or kidney transplantation as current treatment, treatment history including kidney transplantation, absence of diabetes mellitus, better general work ability and higher country gross domestic product were positively associated with employment (P < 0.05). Conclusions Low employment rates and impaired work ability were prevalent among European patients receiving KRT. Demographic, disease-related, work-related and macro-economic factors were associated with employment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Access to various kidney replacement therapy (KRT) modalities for patients with end-stage kidney disease differs substantially within Europe. Methods European adults on KRT filled out an online or paper-based survey about factors influencing and experiences with modality choice (e.g. information provision, decision-making and reasons for choice) between November 2017 and January 2019. We compared countries with low, middle and high gross domestic product (GDP). Results In total, 7820 patients [mean age 59 years, 56% male, 63% on centre haemodialysis (CHD)] from 38 countries participated. Twenty-five percent had received no information on the different modalities, and only 23% received information >12 months before KRT initiation. Patients were not informed about home haemodialysis (HHD) (42%) and comprehensive conservative management (33%). Besides nephrologists, nurses more frequently provided information in high-GDP countries, whereas physicians other than nephrologists did so in low-GDP countries. Patients from low-GDP countries reported later information provision, less information about other modalities than CHD and lower satisfaction with information. The majority of modality decisions were made involving both patient and nephrologist. Patients reported subjective (e.g. quality of life and fears) and objective reasons (e.g. costs and availability of treatments) for modality choice. Patients had good experiences with all modalities, but experiences were better for HHD and kidney transplantation and in middle- and high-GDP countries. Conclusion Our results suggest European differences in patient-reported factors influencing KRT modality choice, possibly caused by disparities in availability of KRT modalities, different healthcare systems and varying patient preferences. Availability of home dialysis and kidney transplantation should be optimized. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Data on renal replacement therapy (RRT) for end-stage renal disease were collected by the European Renal Association (ERA) Registry via national and regional renal registries in Europe and countries bordering the Mediterranean Sea. This article provides a summary of the 2019 ERA Registry Annual Report, including data from 34 countries and additional age comparisons. Methods Individual patient data for 2019 were provided by 35 registries and aggregated data by 17 registries. Using these data, the incidence and prevalence of RRT, the kidney transplantation activity and the survival probabilities were calculated. Results In 2019, a general population of 680.8 million people was covered by the ERA Registry. Overall, the incidence of RRT was 132 per million population (p.m.p.). Of these patients, 62% were men, 54% were ≥65 years of age and 21% had diabetes mellitus as primary renal disease (PRD), and 84% had haemodialysis (HD), 11% had peritoneal dialysis (PD) and 5% had pre-emptive kidney transplantation as an initial treatment modality. The overall prevalence of RRT on 31 December 2019 was 893 p.m.p. with 58% of patients on HD, 5% on PD and 37% living with a kidney transplant. The overall kidney transplant rate was 35 p.m.p. and 29% of the kidney grafts were from a living donor. The unadjusted 5-year survival probability was 42.3% for patients commencing dialysis, 86.6% for recipients of deceased donor grafts and 94.4% for recipients of living donor grafts in the period 2010–14. When comparing age categories, there were substantial differences in the distribution of PRD, treatment modality and kidney donor type, and in the survival probabilities. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Access to forms of dialysis, kidney transplantation (Tx) and comprehensive conservative management (CCM) for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) varies across European countries. Attitudes of nephrologists, information provision and decision-making may influence this access and nephrologists may experience several barriers when providing treatments for ESKD. Methods We surveyed European nephrologists and kidney transplant surgeons treating adults with ESKD about factors influencing modality choice. Descriptive statistics were used to compare the opinions of professionals from European countries with low–, middle– and high–gross domestic product purchasing power parity (GDP PPP). Results In total, 681 professionals from 33 European countries participated. Respondents from all GDP categories indicated that ∼10% of patients received no information before the start of renal replacement therapy (RRT) (P = 0.106). Early information provision and more involvement of patients in decision-making were more frequently reported in middle- and high-GDP countries (P < 0.05). Professionals' attitudes towards several treatments became more positive with increasing GDP (P < 0.05). Uptake of in-centre haemodialysis was sufficient to 73% of respondents, but many wanted increased uptake of home dialysis, Tx and CCM. Respondents experienced different barriers according to availability of specific treatments in their centre. The occurrence of barriers (financial, staff shortage, lack of space/supplies and patient related) decreased with increasing GDP (P < 0.05). Conclusions Differences in factors influencing modality choice when providing RRT or CCM to adults with ESKD were found among low-, middle- and high-GDP countries in Europe. Therefore a unique pan-European policy to improve access to treatments may be inefficient. Different policies for clusters of countries could be more useful. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Large international differences exist in access to renal replacement therapy (RRT) modalities and comprehensive conservative management (CCM) for patients with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD), suggesting that some patients are not receiving the most appropriate treatment. Previous studies mainly focused on barriers reported by patients or medical barriers (e.g. comorbidities) reported by nephrologists. An overview of the non-medical barriers reported by nephrologists when providing the most appropriate form of RRT (other than conventional in-centre haemodialysis) or CCM is lacking. Methods We searched in EMBASE and PubMed for original articles with a cross-sectional design (surveys, interviews or focus groups) published between January 2010 and September 2018. We included studies in which nephrologists reported barriers when providing RRT or CCM to adult patients with ESKD. We used the barriers and facilitators survey by Peters et al. [ Ruimte Voor Verandering? Knelpunten en Mogelijkheden Voor Verbeteringen in de Patiëntenzorg. Nijmegen: Afdeling Kwaliteit van zorg (WOK), 2003] as preliminary framework to create our own model and performed meta-ethnographic analysis of non-medical barriers in text, tables and figures. Results Of the 5973 articles screened, 16 articles were included using surveys (n  = 10), interviews (n  = 5) and focus groups (n  = 1). We categorized the barriers into three levels: patient level (e.g. attitude, role perception, motivation, knowledge and socio-cultural background), level of the healthcare professional (e.g. fears and concerns, working style, communication skills) and level of the healthcare system (e.g. financial barriers, supportive staff and practice organization). Conclusions Our systematic review has identified a number of modifiable, non-medical barriers that could be targeted by, for example, education and optimizing financing structure to improve access to RRT modalities and CCM. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background The European Renal Association – European Dialysis and Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) Registry collects data on kidney replacement therapy (KRT) via national and regional renal registries in Europe and countries bordering the Mediterranean Sea. This article summarizes the 2018 ERA-EDTA Registry Annual Report, and describes the epidemiology of KRT for kidney failure in 34 countries. Methods Individual patient data on patients undergoing KRT in 2018 were provided by 34 national or regional renal registries and aggregated data by 17 registries. The incidence and prevalence of KRT, the kidney transplantation activity and the survival probabilities of these patients were calculated. Results In 2018, the ERA-EDTA Registry covered a general population of 636 million people. Overall, the incidence of KRT for kidney failure was 129 per million population (p.m.p.), 62% of patients were men, 51% were ≥65 years of age and 20% had diabetes mellitus as cause of kidney failure. Treatment modality at the onset of KRT was haemodialysis (HD) for 84%, peritoneal dialysis (PD) for 11% and pre-emptive kidney transplantation for 5% of patients. On 31 December 2018, the prevalence of KRT was 897 p.m.p. with 57% of patients on HD, 5% on PD and 38% living with a kidney transplant. The transplant rate in 2018 was 35 p.m.p.: 68% received a kidney from a deceased donor, 30% from a living donor and for 2% the donor source was unknown. For patients commencing dialysis during 2009–13, the unadjusted 5-year survival probability was 42.6%. For patients receiving a kidney transplant within this period, the unadjusted 5-year survival probability was 86.6% for recipients of deceased donor grafts and 93.9% for recipients of living donor grafts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background We compare reimbursement for haemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) in European countries to assess the impact on government healthcare budgets. We discuss strategies to reduce costs by promoting sustainable dialysis and kidney transplantation. Methods This was a cross-sectional survey among nephrologists conducted online July–December 2016. European countries were categorized by tertiles of gross domestic product per capita (GDP). Reimbursement data were matched to kidney replacement therapy (KRT) data. Results The prevalence per million population of patients being treated with long-term dialysis was not significantly different across tertiles of GDP (P = 0.22). The percentage of PD increased with GDP across tertiles (4.9, 8.2, 13.4%; P < 0.001). The HD-to-PD reimbursement ratio was higher in countries with the highest tertile of GDP (0.7, 1.0 versus 1.7; P = 0.007). Home HD was mainly reimbursed in countries with the highest tertile of GDP (15, 15 versus 69%; P = 0.005). The percentage of public health expenditure for reimbursement of dialysis decreased across tertiles of GDP (3.3, 1.5, 0.7%; P < 0.001). Transplantation as a proportion of all KRT increased across tertiles of GDP (18.5, 39.5, 56.0%; P < 0.001). Conclusions In Europe, dialysis has a disproportionately high impact on public health expenditure, especially in countries with a lower GDP. In these countries, the cost difference between PD and HD is smaller, and home dialysis and transplantation are less frequently provided than in countries with a higher GDP. In-depth evaluation and analysis of influential economic and political measures are needed to steer optimized reimbursement strategies for KRT. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background An increase in the dialysis programme expenditure is expected in most countries given the continued rise in the number of people with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) globally. Since chronic peritoneal dialysis (PD) therapy is relatively less expensive compared with haemodialysis (HD) and because there is no survival difference between PD and HD, identifying factors associated with PD use is important. Methods Incidence counts for the years 2003–05 were available from 36 countries worldwide. We studied associations of population characteristics, macroeconomic factors and renal service indicators with the percentage of patients on PD at Day 91 after starting dialysis. With linear regression models, we obtained relative risks (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs). Results The median percentage of incident patients on PD was 12% (interquartile range: 7–26%). Determinants independently associated with lower percentages of patients on PD were as follows: patients with diabetic kidney disease (per 5% increase) (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.89–0.97), health expenditure as % gross domestic product (per 1% increase) (RR 0.93; 95% CI 0.87–0.98), private-for-profit share of HD facilities (per 1% increase) (RR 0.996; 95% CI 0.99–1.00; P = 0.04), costs of PD consumables relative to staffing (per 0.1 increase) (RR 0.97; 95% CI 0.95–0.99). Conclusions The factors associated with a lower percentage of patients on PD include higher diabetes prevalence, higher healthcare expenditures, larger share of private-for-profit centres and higher costs of PD consumables relative to staffing. Whether dialysis modality mix can be influenced by changing healthcare organization and funding requires additional studies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background. Information on demographics and survival of patients starting renal replacement therapy (RRT) for end-stage renal disease (ESRD) due to multiple myeloma (MM) or light-chain deposit disease (LCDD) is scarce. The aim of this study was to describe the incidence, characteristics, causes of death and survival rates of RRT for ESRD due to MM or LCDD in the ERA-EDTA Registry. Methods. Thirteen national registries providing data on patients who started RRT from 1986–2005 to the ERA-EDTA Registry participated. Incidence per million population (pmp) of RRT for ESRD due to MM or LCDD and other causes (non-MM) was observed overtime. Patient survival on RRT was examined, unadjusted and adjusted for age and gender. Results. Of the 159 637 patients on RRT, 2453 (1.54%) had MM or LCDD. The incidence of RRT for ESRD due to MM or LCDD, adjusted for age and gender, increased from 0.70 pmp in 1986–1990 to 2.52 pmp in 2001–2005. MM and LCDD patients compared to non-MM patients were older and a higher percentage was on haemodialysis at day 91 after the start of RRT. The most common causes of death in MM and LCDD patients were malignancy (36.1%), cardiovascular causes (17.2%) and infection (14.7%). MM and LCDD patients had a 2.77 (95% CI, 2.65–2.90) higher risk of death compared to non-MM patients. The unadjusted median survival on RRT was 0.91 years in MM and LCDD patients and 4.46 years in non-MM patients. During follow-up, 35 patients were transplanted and their mean survival was 9.6 years. Conclusion. The incidence of RRT for ESRD due to MM or LCDD has increased over the past 20 years in Europe. The median patient survival on RRT for MM and LCDD patients was 0.91 years, compared to 4.46 years for non-MM patients. These results suggest that dialysis, and in selected cases even transplantation, should be offered to MM and LCDD patients. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]