Abstract
The study reports the cost-effectiveness results of end-stage renal disease (ESDR) patients in Mexico in terms of years of life gained and quality of life and the economic cost with regards to three treatment alternatives that could be considered mutually exclusive: continuous peritoneal ambulatory dialysis (CAPD), hemodialysis (HD) and renal transplant (RT). The economic costs were calculated by using the average cost case-management methodology and further, the probable of life expectancy and the quality of life were cross-sectionally assessed by means of the Quality Adjusted Life Years (QALY) measured by the Rosser Index. The results show that economic costs in US$ of the three treatment alternatives were: CAPD $5,643.07, HD $9,631.60, and RT $3,021.63. The probability of life expectancy for CAPD and RT for the first and third year were: 86.2% and 66.9%, and 89.9% and 79.6%, respectively. The QALY scores for patients were: CAPD 0.8794, HD 0.8640, and RT 0.9783. The intervention with the highest cost-effectiveness coefficient was the renal transplant (3,088.69), followed by the CAPD (6,416.95) and HD (11,147.68). A significant difference was found between the transplanted patients and patients undergoing dialysis. Finally, this study concluded that the RT offers the least expensive alternative and the greatest number of years of life gained as well as providing significant changes in the quality of life of ESRD patients.
Highlights
The results show that economic costs in US$ of the three treatment alternatives were: CAPD $5,643.07, HD $9,631.60, and renal transplant (RT) $3,021.63
A significant difference was found between the transplanted patients and patients undergoing dialysis
This study concluded that the RT offers the least expensive alternative and the greatest number of years of life gained as well as providing significant changes in the quality of life of ESRD patients
Summary
Analisó el costo-efectividad en intervenciones para pacientes con insuficiencia renal crónica terminal (IRCT) en términos de los costos económicos de cada intervención, los años de vida ganados y la calidad de vida que generan tres alternativas comparables y mutuamente excluyentes: diálisis peritoneal contínua ambulatoria (DPCA), la hemodiálisis (HD) y el trasplante renal (TR). En cuanto a la efectividad, la sobrevida del injerto de trasplante renal resultó de 89,9% y 79,6% a uno y tres años respectivamente, mientras que los pacientes sometidos a DPCA tienen una sobrevida de 86,2% y 66,9% a un año y a tres años respectivamente. La intervención más costo-efectiva resultó el trasplante renal con un coeficiente de 3,088.69, seguido de la DPCA y la hemodiálisis, cuyos coeficientes fueron de 6,416.95 y 11,147.68 respectivamente.
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
