#6211 THE OPPORTUNITY COSTS EXPERIENCED BY PATIENTS WHO INJECT DRUGS UNDERGOING HAEMODIALYSIS: A CASE SERIES

Abstract

Abstract Background and Aims Patients who inject drugs (PWIDs) represent a uniquely difficult population to manage with haemodialysis, often with reliance on tunneled venous access. This population is historically difficult to reach, and their care is usually associated with higher per capita healthcare costs [1], unsurprisingly poor outcomes are reported [2] with a multitude of likely causes. Here we show the time associated opportunity costs these patients experience including the significant complication of tunnelled dialysis line infection in a person who actively injects drugs. Method This study follows on from the work by Burns [3]. In this retrospective observational study, the electronic health records of patients who were known to be ongoing users of recreational drugs were reviewed from January 2015 – August 2021. Patients were reviewed from their first tunneled line placement until either their death or until the end of the study time period. Stata 14 was used to generate descriptive statistics. Results 6 Patients were identified, 5 had a primary diagnosis of AA Amyloidosis with the other being IgA. This cohort of patients did poorly, 5 out of 6 of the cohort had died with a mean survival of 27 months. Patients were followed for an average of 769 days (range 485 - 1052). The majority of this time alive was spent as an inpatient with the mean percentage of time as an inpatient being 55% (Range 35–81%) with a mean of 411 total inpatient days. The first confirmed bacteraemia occurred within the first 100 days in 4 out of 6 of the patients. Conclusion With this case series we demonstrate the opportunity cost PWIDs experience in the form of time spent as an inpatient. This cost is further added to by the burden of outpatient maintenance haemodialysis. Consideration should also be given to the excess burden their care places on over-stretched healthcare systems. Infections and dialysis compliance are key components in the care of PWIDs and while moving away from tunneled access should be sought whenever possible a multidisciplinary approach should also be considered; these patients commonly lead chaotic lifestyles and in-center dialysis is usually the only option. Including addiction, social and psychiatric services alongside dialysis may be a way to engage with this historically difficult to reach population. The hope is that this study provides the incentive for further studies focusing on the opportunity costs and the quality of life this population can expect when embarking on haemodialysis. This would provide patients with realistic expectations while also aiding clinicians in navigating this difficult ethical situation.