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...
Gespeichert in:
Veröffentlicht in: | Journal of chronic diseases 1985, Vol.38 (7), p.589-601 |
---|---|
Hauptverfasser: | , , |
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 |