Blog
About

0
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found

      Hospital Utilization and Costs in Older Patients with Advanced Chronic Kidney Disease Choosing Conservative Care or Dialysis: A Retrospective Cohort Study

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background: Nondialytic conservative care has been recognized as a viable alternative to chronic dialysis in older patients with end-stage kidney disease, but little is known about its consequences on hospital utilization and costs. Methods: We performed a retrospective cohort study to compare outpatient and inpatient hospital utilization, place of death, and hospital costs in patients aged ≥70 years old who chose conservative care ( n = 100) or dialysis ( n = 162) after shared decision making in a nonacademic teaching hospital between 2008 and 2016. Results: Patients who chose conservative care were older than patients who chose dialysis (82.5 vs. 76.3 years). Comorbidity did not differ between the 2 patient groups. The incidence rates of outpatient visits per year were 7.1 in patients who chose conservative care and 10.7 in patients who chose dialysis (incidence rate ratio 0.67, 95% CI 0.55–0.81). The incidence rates of in-hospital days per year were, respectively, 6.0 and 9.8 (incidence rate ratio 0.50, 95% CI 0.29–0.88). Also in the final month of life, patients on conservative care had less outpatient visits, were less frequently hospitalized, and died less frequently in hospital than the dialysis patient group. The cost rates per year, measured from original treatment decision, were EUR 5,859 in conservative care patients and EUR 28,354 in patients who chose dialysis comprising both the predialysis and dialysis period (cost rate ratio 0.42, 95% CI 0.27–0.65). Patients who chose dialysis had higher costs on dialysis sessions, outpatient care, inpatient care, laboratory tests, and medical imaging. Conclusions: Patients who decided to forego dialysis and chose conservative care had less outpatient and inpatient hospital utilization than patients who chose dialysis, including less intensive hospital utilization near the end of life. Both overall and nondialysis-related costs were lower in patients on a conservative care pathway.

          Related collections

          Author and article information

          Journal
          BPU
          Blood Purif
          10.1159/issn.0253-5068
          Blood Purification
          S. Karger AG
          0253-5068
          1421-9735
          2020
          July 2020
          10 January 2020
          : 49
          : 4
          : 479-489
          Affiliations
          aDepartment of Internal Medicine, St. Antonius Hospital, Utrecht, The Netherlands
          bDepartment of Internal Medicine, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands
          cDepartment of Nephrology and Hypertension, University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
          dJulius Center for Health Sciences and Primary Care, University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands
          Author notes
          *Wouter R. Verberne, MD, Department of Internal Medicine, St. Antonius Hospital, Koekoekslaan 1, Nieuwegein, NL–3435 CM Utrecht (The Netherlands), w.verberne@antoniusziekenhuis.nl
          Article
          505569 Blood Purif 2020;49:479–489
          10.1159/000505569
          31927544
          © 2020 S. Karger AG, Basel

          Copyright: All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be translated into other languages, reproduced or utilized in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, microcopying, or by any information storage and retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Drug Dosage: The authors and the publisher have exerted every effort to ensure that drug selection and dosage set forth in this text are in accord with current recommendations and practice at the time of publication. However, in view of ongoing research, changes in government regulations, and the constant flow of information relating to drug therapy and drug reactions, the reader is urged to check the package insert for each drug for any changes in indications and dosage and for added warnings and precautions. This is particularly important when the recommended agent is a new and/or infrequently employed drug. Disclaimer: The statements, opinions and data contained in this publication are solely those of the individual authors and contributors and not of the publishers and the editor(s). The appearance of advertisements or/and product references in the publication is not a warranty, endorsement, or approval of the products or services advertised or of their effectiveness, quality or safety. The publisher and the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to persons or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content or advertisements.

          Page count
          Figures: 4, Tables: 4, Pages: 11
          Categories
          Hemodialysis – Research Article

          Comments

          Comment on this article