Comparison of hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis - A cost-utility analysis
2002 (English)In: Peritoneal Dialysis International, ISSN 0896-8608, Vol. 22, no 1, 39-47 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
? Objective: Our aim was to compare both health-related quality of life and costs for hemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) in a defined population. ? Design: Decision-tree modeling to estimate total costs and effects for two treatment strategies, HD and PD, among patients with chronic kidney failure, for 5 years following the start of treatment. Courses of events and health-care consumption were mapped in a retrospective matched-record study. Data on health status were obtained from a matched population by a quality-of-life questionnaire (EuroQol). The study has a societal perspective. ? Setting: All dialysis departments in the southeastern health-care region of Sweden. ? Patients: 136 patients with kidney failure, comprising 68 matched pairs, were included in a retrospective record study, 81 patients with kidney failure, comprising 27 matched triplets, were included in a prospective questionnaire study. ? Main Outcome Measures: Cost per life year and cost per quality-adjusted life year. ? Results: The cost per quality-adjusted life year for PD was lower in all analyzed age groups. There was a 12% difference in the age group 21 - 40 years, a 31% difference in the age group 41 - 60 years, and an 11% difference in the age group 61+ years. Peritoneal dialysis and HD resulted in similar frequencies of transplantation (50% and 41%, respectively) and expected survival (3.58 years and 3.56 years, respectively) during the first 5 years after the initiation of treatment. ? Conclusion: The cost-utility ratio is most favorable for PD as the primary method of treatment for patients eligible for both PD and HD.
Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2002. Vol. 22, no 1, 39-47 p.
IdentifiersURN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-26261Local ID: 10770OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-26261DiVA: diva2:246809