Transplantation and home hemodialysis: Their cost-effectiveness

Transplantation and home hemodialysis treatments have been available to treat patients with end stage renal disease for several years but it is not clear which approach is most cost-effective. This study compared the costs of hemodialysis and transplantation for comparable patients using the margina...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of chronic diseases 1985, Vol.38 (7), p.589-601
Hauptverfasser: Tousignant, Pierre, Guttmann, Ronald D., Hollomby, David J.
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 601
container_issue 7
container_start_page 589
container_title Journal of chronic diseases
container_volume 38
creator Tousignant, Pierre
Guttmann, Ronald D.
Hollomby, David J.
description Transplantation and home hemodialysis treatments have been available to treat patients with end stage renal disease for several years but it is not clear which approach is most cost-effective. This study compared the costs of hemodialysis and transplantation for comparable patients using the marginal cost methodology. Sixteen patients in a home program were matched with 16 patients in a transplantation program for sex, age, primary disease and other medical diseases. Questionnaires and a chart review allowed the accounting of all health services received in hospitals, offices or at home, and provided indicators of treatment effectiveness. The impact of the additional services generated by choosing one treatment over the other (difference between the two programs) was evaluated in terms of personnel, equipment and supplies. Survival and rehabilitation were similar in the two groups. However, for each year of follow-up, transplantation was considerably less expensive than home dialysis. These results suggest that transplantation is the most cost-effective way to treat end stage renal failure, at least for the subgroup of patients equally eligible for either transplantation or home dialysis.
doi_str_mv 10.1016/0021-9681(85)90048-7
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_76171540</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>0021968185900487</els_id><sourcerecordid>76171540</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c386t-525d198963801d78ca808e281461d22441691e115e1e6312e8bfa6aca87865493</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kD1PwzAQhj2ASin8A5AyIRgCvsR2bAYQQnxJlVjKbLnxRTVK4mKnlfrvcWnVkel097739RByAfQWKIg7SgvIlZBwLfmNopTJvDoi40P5hJzG-J1SybgakVGpCqYYH5PHWTB9XLamH8zgfJ-Z3mYL32G2wM5bZ9pNdPE-my3Qhaz2ccixabAe3Bp7jPGMHDemjXi-jxPy9foye37Pp59vH89P07wupRhyXnALSipRSgq2krWRVGIhgQmwRcEYCAUIwBFQlFCgnDdGmGSrpOBMlRNytZu7DP5nhXHQnYs1tulw9KuoKwEVcEaTke2MdfAxBmz0MrjOhI0Gqres9BaK3kLRkus_VrpKbZf7-at5h_bQtAeV9IedjunJtcOgY-2wr9G6kGho693_C34BcwR5JQ</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>76171540</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Transplantation and home hemodialysis: Their cost-effectiveness</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Tousignant, Pierre ; Guttmann, Ronald D. ; Hollomby, David J.</creator><creatorcontrib>Tousignant, Pierre ; Guttmann, Ronald D. ; Hollomby, David J.</creatorcontrib><description>Transplantation and home hemodialysis treatments have been available to treat patients with end stage renal disease for several years but it is not clear which approach is most cost-effective. This study compared the costs of hemodialysis and transplantation for comparable patients using the marginal cost methodology. Sixteen patients in a home program were matched with 16 patients in a transplantation program for sex, age, primary disease and other medical diseases. Questionnaires and a chart review allowed the accounting of all health services received in hospitals, offices or at home, and provided indicators of treatment effectiveness. The impact of the additional services generated by choosing one treatment over the other (difference between the two programs) was evaluated in terms of personnel, equipment and supplies. Survival and rehabilitation were similar in the two groups. However, for each year of follow-up, transplantation was considerably less expensive than home dialysis. These results suggest that transplantation is the most cost-effective way to treat end stage renal failure, at least for the subgroup of patients equally eligible for either transplantation or home dialysis.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0021-9681</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1016/0021-9681(85)90048-7</identifier><identifier>PMID: 3924945</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>England: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Actuarial Analysis ; Adolescent ; Adult ; Canada ; Child ; Cost-Benefit Analysis ; Health Services - economics ; Home Care Services - economics ; Humans ; Kidney Failure, Chronic - economics ; Kidney Failure, Chronic - therapy ; Kidney Transplantation ; Middle Aged ; Renal Dialysis - economics ; Time Factors</subject><ispartof>Journal of chronic diseases, 1985, Vol.38 (7), p.589-601</ispartof><rights>1985</rights><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c386t-525d198963801d78ca808e281461d22441691e115e1e6312e8bfa6aca87865493</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c386t-525d198963801d78ca808e281461d22441691e115e1e6312e8bfa6aca87865493</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>315,781,785,4025,27928,27929,27930</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3924945$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Tousignant, Pierre</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guttmann, Ronald D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hollomby, David J.</creatorcontrib><title>Transplantation and home hemodialysis: Their cost-effectiveness</title><title>Journal of chronic diseases</title><addtitle>J Chronic Dis</addtitle><description>Transplantation and home hemodialysis treatments have been available to treat patients with end stage renal disease for several years but it is not clear which approach is most cost-effective. This study compared the costs of hemodialysis and transplantation for comparable patients using the marginal cost methodology. Sixteen patients in a home program were matched with 16 patients in a transplantation program for sex, age, primary disease and other medical diseases. Questionnaires and a chart review allowed the accounting of all health services received in hospitals, offices or at home, and provided indicators of treatment effectiveness. The impact of the additional services generated by choosing one treatment over the other (difference between the two programs) was evaluated in terms of personnel, equipment and supplies. Survival and rehabilitation were similar in the two groups. However, for each year of follow-up, transplantation was considerably less expensive than home dialysis. These results suggest that transplantation is the most cost-effective way to treat end stage renal failure, at least for the subgroup of patients equally eligible for either transplantation or home dialysis.</description><subject>Actuarial Analysis</subject><subject>Adolescent</subject><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Canada</subject><subject>Child</subject><subject>Cost-Benefit Analysis</subject><subject>Health Services - economics</subject><subject>Home Care Services - economics</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Kidney Failure, Chronic - economics</subject><subject>Kidney Failure, Chronic - therapy</subject><subject>Kidney Transplantation</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Renal Dialysis - economics</subject><subject>Time Factors</subject><issn>0021-9681</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>1985</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kD1PwzAQhj2ASin8A5AyIRgCvsR2bAYQQnxJlVjKbLnxRTVK4mKnlfrvcWnVkel097739RByAfQWKIg7SgvIlZBwLfmNopTJvDoi40P5hJzG-J1SybgakVGpCqYYH5PHWTB9XLamH8zgfJ-Z3mYL32G2wM5bZ9pNdPE-my3Qhaz2ccixabAe3Bp7jPGMHDemjXi-jxPy9foye37Pp59vH89P07wupRhyXnALSipRSgq2krWRVGIhgQmwRcEYCAUIwBFQlFCgnDdGmGSrpOBMlRNytZu7DP5nhXHQnYs1tulw9KuoKwEVcEaTke2MdfAxBmz0MrjOhI0Gqres9BaK3kLRkus_VrpKbZf7-at5h_bQtAeV9IedjunJtcOgY-2wr9G6kGho693_C34BcwR5JQ</recordid><startdate>1985</startdate><enddate>1985</enddate><creator>Tousignant, Pierre</creator><creator>Guttmann, Ronald D.</creator><creator>Hollomby, David J.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>1985</creationdate><title>Transplantation and home hemodialysis: Their cost-effectiveness</title><author>Tousignant, Pierre ; Guttmann, Ronald D. ; Hollomby, David J.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c386t-525d198963801d78ca808e281461d22441691e115e1e6312e8bfa6aca87865493</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>1985</creationdate><topic>Actuarial Analysis</topic><topic>Adolescent</topic><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Canada</topic><topic>Child</topic><topic>Cost-Benefit Analysis</topic><topic>Health Services - economics</topic><topic>Home Care Services - economics</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Kidney Failure, Chronic - economics</topic><topic>Kidney Failure, Chronic - therapy</topic><topic>Kidney Transplantation</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Renal Dialysis - economics</topic><topic>Time Factors</topic><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Tousignant, Pierre</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Guttmann, Ronald D.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Hollomby, David J.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of chronic diseases</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Tousignant, Pierre</au><au>Guttmann, Ronald D.</au><au>Hollomby, David J.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Transplantation and home hemodialysis: Their cost-effectiveness</atitle><jtitle>Journal of chronic diseases</jtitle><addtitle>J Chronic Dis</addtitle><date>1985</date><risdate>1985</risdate><volume>38</volume><issue>7</issue><spage>589</spage><epage>601</epage><pages>589-601</pages><issn>0021-9681</issn><abstract>Transplantation and home hemodialysis treatments have been available to treat patients with end stage renal disease for several years but it is not clear which approach is most cost-effective. This study compared the costs of hemodialysis and transplantation for comparable patients using the marginal cost methodology. Sixteen patients in a home program were matched with 16 patients in a transplantation program for sex, age, primary disease and other medical diseases. Questionnaires and a chart review allowed the accounting of all health services received in hospitals, offices or at home, and provided indicators of treatment effectiveness. The impact of the additional services generated by choosing one treatment over the other (difference between the two programs) was evaluated in terms of personnel, equipment and supplies. Survival and rehabilitation were similar in the two groups. However, for each year of follow-up, transplantation was considerably less expensive than home dialysis. These results suggest that transplantation is the most cost-effective way to treat end stage renal failure, at least for the subgroup of patients equally eligible for either transplantation or home dialysis.</abstract><cop>England</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>3924945</pmid><doi>10.1016/0021-9681(85)90048-7</doi><tpages>13</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 0021-9681
ispartof Journal of chronic diseases, 1985, Vol.38 (7), p.589-601
issn 0021-9681
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_76171540
source MEDLINE; Alma/SFX Local Collection
subjects Actuarial Analysis
Adolescent
Adult
Canada
Child
Cost-Benefit Analysis
Health Services - economics
Home Care Services - economics
Humans
Kidney Failure, Chronic - economics
Kidney Failure, Chronic - therapy
Kidney Transplantation
Middle Aged
Renal Dialysis - economics
Time Factors
title Transplantation and home hemodialysis: Their cost-effectiveness
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-13T21%3A59%3A11IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Transplantation%20and%20home%20hemodialysis:%20Their%20cost-effectiveness&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20chronic%20diseases&rft.au=Tousignant,%20Pierre&rft.date=1985&rft.volume=38&rft.issue=7&rft.spage=589&rft.epage=601&rft.pages=589-601&rft.issn=0021-9681&rft_id=info:doi/10.1016/0021-9681(85)90048-7&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E76171540%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=76171540&rft_id=info:pmid/3924945&rft_els_id=0021968185900487&rfr_iscdi=true