Induced demand in kidney replacement therapy.

There are three notable aspects of the current kidney replacement therapy program. First, the number of patients on home dialysis has dropped substantially over the last decades. Second, the rate of transplantation has stabilized in recent years. Third, there is variation in referral rate for transplantation among hospitals. These trends are the result of overutilization of in-center dialysis and that demand for kidney replacement therapy is moderated by suppliers. Current healthcare policy leads to overutilization of in-center dialysis and underutilization of home dialysis and transplantation. This overutilization is the result of supplier-induced demand and leads to suboptimal care for patients and excessive healthcare expenditures. The main drivers of this overutilization are the overcapacity of in-center dialysis beds and the high financial disincentives on empty dialysis beds. Policymakers should address this by reducing dialysis capacity and increasing the capacity of transplantation facilities. This is the first attempt to address the overutilization and the nonalignment of supply and demand by looking at the capacity of in-center dialysis and the financial disincentives for physicians on empty in-center dialysis beds. In our analysis, we conclude that limiting the capacity of in-center dialysis beds is the most effective strategy to better align supply and demand, which will result in better patient outcomes and lower societal costs.

A dynamic Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of the Kidney Team at Home intervention in The Netherlands.

OBJECTIVES: The Kidney Team at Home program is an educational intervention aimed at patients with chronic kidney disease to assist them in their choice for kidney replacement therapy. Previous studies have shown that the intervention results in an increase in knowledge and communication on kidney replacement therapy, and eventually in an increase in the number of living donor kidney transplantations. The study assesses the cost-effectiveness of the intervention compared to standard care. METHODS: A dynamic probabilistic Markov model was used to estimate the monetary and health benefits of the intervention in The Netherlands over 10 years. Data on costs and health-related quality of life were derived from the literature. Transition probabilities, prevalence, and incidence rates were calculated using a large national database. An optimistic and a pessimistic implementation scenario were compared to a base case scenario with standard care. RESULTS: In both the optimistic and pessimistic scenario, the intervention is cost-effective and dominant compared to standard care: savings were €108,681,985 and €51,770,060 and the benefits were 1382 and 695 QALYs, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The superior cost-effectiveness of the intervention is caused by the superior health effects and the reduction of costs associated with transplantation, and the relatively small incremental costs of the intervention. The favorable findings of this implementation project resulted in national uptake of the intervention in The Netherlands as of 2021. This is the first time a psychosocial intervention has been implemented as part of standard care in a kidney replacement therapy program worldwide.

Implementation of the kidney team at home intervention: Evaluating generalizability, implementation process, and effects.

Research has shown that a home-based educational intervention for patients with chronic kidney disease results in better knowledge and communication, and more living donor kidney transplantations (LDKT). Implementation research in the field of renal care is almost nonexistent. The aims of this study were (1) to demonstrate generalizability, (2) evaluate the implementation process, and (3) to assess the relationship of intervention effects on LDKT-activity. Eight hospitals participated in the project. Patients eligible for all kidney replacement therapies (KRT) were invited to participate. Effect outcomes were KRT-knowledge and KRT-communication, and treatment choice. Feasibility, fidelity, and intervention costs were assessed as part of the process evaluation. Three hundred and thirty-two patients completed the intervention. There was a significant increase in KRT-knowledge and KRT-communication among participants. One hundred and twenty-nine out of 332 patients (39%) had LDKT-activity, which was in line with the results of the clinical trials. Protocol adherence, knowledge, and age were correlated with LDKT-activity. This unique implementation study shows that the results in practice are comparable to the previous trials, and show that the intervention can be implemented, while maintaining quality. Results from the project resulted in the uptake of the intervention in standard care. We urge other countries to investigate the uptake of the intervention.

Factors influencing access to kidney transplantation: a research protocol of a qualitative study on stakeholders' perspectives.

INTRODUCTION: Unequal access to kidney transplantation is suggested, but no systematic inventory exists about factors influencing access to kidney transplantation. There is an absence of any research that has combined stakeholder perspectives along the complete trajectory of transplantation. The present qualitative study explores the contributing factors from the perspectives of multiple stakeholders in this trajectory, including patients, health professionals and health insurance and financial representatives in the Netherlands. Moreover, stakeholders will be invited to suggesting strategies and solutions for handling the facilitating and hindering factors found. By means of interaction, stakeholder groups will arrive at a consensus for new policymaking in the field of a Dutch transplantation care. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The different stakeholders' perspectives and possible solutions will be explored by interviewing in three phases. In the first phase, stakeholders' group perspectives will be explored with individual interviews and focus group interviews without confrontation of views from other perspectives. In the second phase of focus group interviewing, perspectives will be confronted with the other stakeholders' perspectives assessed. Finally, in the third phase, stakeholders will be invited to focus group discussions for suggesting solutions to overcome barriers and promote facilitators for improving access to transplantation. Approximately, groups from six to twelve participants per focus group and four to maximal six focus groups will be held per stakeholder, depending on the level of saturation, as prescribed by grounded theory. The interviews will be audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim, and qualitative data will be analysed according to the principles of grounded theory supported by using NVivo software. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The Medical Ethical Committee of Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, has approved this study. The results will be disseminated in peer-reviewed journals and major international conferences.

Cost-effectiveness of the treatments for critical limb ischemia in the elderly population.

OBJECTIVE: The treatment of critical limb ischemia (CLI), with the intention to prevent limb loss, is often an intensive and expensive therapy. The aim of this study was to examine the cost-effectiveness of endovascular and conservative treatment of elderly CLI patients unsuitable for surgery. METHODS: In this prospective observational cohort study, data were gathered in two Dutch peripheral hospitals. CLI patients aged 70 years or older were included in the outpatient clinic. Exclusion criteria were malignant disease, lack of language skills, and cognitive impairment; 195 patients were included and 192 patients were excluded. After a multidisciplinary vascular conference, patients were divided into three treatment groups (endovascular revascularization, surgical revascularization, or conservative therapy). Subanalyses based on age were made (70-79 years and ≥80 years). The follow-up period was 2 years. Cost-effectiveness of endovascular and conservative treatment was quantified using incremental cost-effectiveness ratios (ICERs) in euros per quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs). RESULTS: At baseline, patients allocated to surgical revascularization had better health states, but the health states of endovascular revascularization and conservative therapy patients were comparable. With an ICER of €38,247.41/QALY (∼$50,869/QALY), endovascular revascularization was cost-effective compared with conservative therapy. This is favorable compared with the Dutch applicable threshold of €80,000/QALY (∼$106,400/QALY). The subanalyses also established that endovascular revascularization is a cost-effective alternative for conservative treatment both in patients aged 70 to 79 years (ICER €29,898.36/QALY; ∼$39,765/QALY) and in octogenarians (ICER €56,810.14/QALY; ∼$75,557/QALY). CONCLUSIONS: Our study has shown that endovascular revascularization is cost-effective compared with conservative treatment of CLI patients older than 70 years and also in octogenarians. Given the small absolute differences in costs and effects, physicians should also consider individual circumstances that can alter the outcome of the intervention. Cost-effectiveness remains one of the aspects to take into consideration in making a clinical decision.

Cost-effectiveness of a home-based group educational programme on renal replacement therapies: a study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Living donor kidney transplantation (LDKT) is the optimal treatment for most patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). However, there are numerous patients who cannot find a living kidney donor. Randomised controlled trials have shown that home-based education for patients with ESRD and their family/friends leads to four times more LDKTs. This educational intervention is currently being implemented in eight hospitals in the Netherlands. Supervision and quality assessment are being employed to maintain the quality of the intervention. In this study, we aim to: (1) conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of the educational programme and its quality assurance system; (2) investigate the relationship between the quality of the implementation of the intervention and the outcomes knowledge, communication and LDKT activities; and (3) investigate policy implications. METHODS AND DESIGN: Patients with ESRD who do not have a living kidney donor are eligible to receive the home-based educational intervention. This is carried out by allied health transplantation professionals and psychologists across eight hospitals in the Netherlands. The cost-effectiveness analysis will be conducted with a Markov model. Cost data will be obtained from the literature. We will obtain the quality of life data from the patients who participate in the educational programme. Questionnaires on knowledge and communication will be used to measure the outcomes of the programme. Data on LDKT activities will be obtained from medical records up to 24 months after the education. A protocol adherence measure will be assessed by a third party by means of a telephone interview with the patients and the invitees. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval was obtained through all participating hospitals. Results will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publications and scientific presentations. Results of the cost-effectiveness of the educational programme will also be disseminated to the Dutch National Health Care Institute. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NL6529.