Cargando…
An Economic Assessment Model of Rural and Remote Satellite Hemodialysis Units
BACKGROUND: Kidney Failure is epidemic in many remote communities in Canada. In-centre hemodialysis is provided within these settings in satellite hemodialysis units. The key cost drivers of this program have not been fully described. Such information is important in informing the design of programs...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Public Library of Science
2015
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4540589/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26284357 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0135587 |
_version_ | 1782386274724741120 |
---|---|
author | Ferguson, Thomas W. Zacharias, James Walker, Simon R. Collister, David Rigatto, Claudio Tangri, Navdeep Komenda, Paul |
author_facet | Ferguson, Thomas W. Zacharias, James Walker, Simon R. Collister, David Rigatto, Claudio Tangri, Navdeep Komenda, Paul |
author_sort | Ferguson, Thomas W. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Kidney Failure is epidemic in many remote communities in Canada. In-centre hemodialysis is provided within these settings in satellite hemodialysis units. The key cost drivers of this program have not been fully described. Such information is important in informing the design of programs aimed at optimizing efficiency in providing dialysis and preventative chronic kidney disease care in remote communities. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND MEASUREMENTS: We constructed a cost model based on data derived from 16 of Manitoba, Canada’s remote satellite units. We included all costs for operation of the unit, transportation, treatment, and capital costs. All costs were presented in 2013 Canadian dollars. RESULTS: The annual per-patient cost of providing hemodialysis in the satellite units ranged from $80,372 to $215,918 per patient, per year. The median per patient, per year cost was $99,888 (IQR $89,057—$122,640). Primary cost drivers were capital costs related to construction, human resource expenses, and expenses for return to tertiary care centres for health care. Costs related to transport considerably increased estimates in units that required plane or helicopter transfers. CONCLUSIONS: Satellite hemodialysis units in remote areas are more expensive on a per-patient basis than hospital hemodialysis and satellite hemodialysis available in urban areas. In some rural, remote locations, better value for money may reside in local surveillance and prevention programs in addition support for home dialysis therapies over construction of new satellite hemodialysis units. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4540589 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2015 |
publisher | Public Library of Science |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-45405892015-08-24 An Economic Assessment Model of Rural and Remote Satellite Hemodialysis Units Ferguson, Thomas W. Zacharias, James Walker, Simon R. Collister, David Rigatto, Claudio Tangri, Navdeep Komenda, Paul PLoS One Research Article BACKGROUND: Kidney Failure is epidemic in many remote communities in Canada. In-centre hemodialysis is provided within these settings in satellite hemodialysis units. The key cost drivers of this program have not been fully described. Such information is important in informing the design of programs aimed at optimizing efficiency in providing dialysis and preventative chronic kidney disease care in remote communities. DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, AND MEASUREMENTS: We constructed a cost model based on data derived from 16 of Manitoba, Canada’s remote satellite units. We included all costs for operation of the unit, transportation, treatment, and capital costs. All costs were presented in 2013 Canadian dollars. RESULTS: The annual per-patient cost of providing hemodialysis in the satellite units ranged from $80,372 to $215,918 per patient, per year. The median per patient, per year cost was $99,888 (IQR $89,057—$122,640). Primary cost drivers were capital costs related to construction, human resource expenses, and expenses for return to tertiary care centres for health care. Costs related to transport considerably increased estimates in units that required plane or helicopter transfers. CONCLUSIONS: Satellite hemodialysis units in remote areas are more expensive on a per-patient basis than hospital hemodialysis and satellite hemodialysis available in urban areas. In some rural, remote locations, better value for money may reside in local surveillance and prevention programs in addition support for home dialysis therapies over construction of new satellite hemodialysis units. Public Library of Science 2015-08-18 /pmc/articles/PMC4540589/ /pubmed/26284357 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0135587 Text en © 2015 Ferguson et al http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are properly credited. |
spellingShingle | Research Article Ferguson, Thomas W. Zacharias, James Walker, Simon R. Collister, David Rigatto, Claudio Tangri, Navdeep Komenda, Paul An Economic Assessment Model of Rural and Remote Satellite Hemodialysis Units |
title | An Economic Assessment Model of Rural and Remote Satellite Hemodialysis Units |
title_full | An Economic Assessment Model of Rural and Remote Satellite Hemodialysis Units |
title_fullStr | An Economic Assessment Model of Rural and Remote Satellite Hemodialysis Units |
title_full_unstemmed | An Economic Assessment Model of Rural and Remote Satellite Hemodialysis Units |
title_short | An Economic Assessment Model of Rural and Remote Satellite Hemodialysis Units |
title_sort | economic assessment model of rural and remote satellite hemodialysis units |
topic | Research Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4540589/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26284357 http://dx.doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0135587 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT fergusonthomasw aneconomicassessmentmodelofruralandremotesatellitehemodialysisunits AT zachariasjames aneconomicassessmentmodelofruralandremotesatellitehemodialysisunits AT walkersimonr aneconomicassessmentmodelofruralandremotesatellitehemodialysisunits AT collisterdavid aneconomicassessmentmodelofruralandremotesatellitehemodialysisunits AT rigattoclaudio aneconomicassessmentmodelofruralandremotesatellitehemodialysisunits AT tangrinavdeep aneconomicassessmentmodelofruralandremotesatellitehemodialysisunits AT komendapaul aneconomicassessmentmodelofruralandremotesatellitehemodialysisunits AT fergusonthomasw economicassessmentmodelofruralandremotesatellitehemodialysisunits AT zachariasjames economicassessmentmodelofruralandremotesatellitehemodialysisunits AT walkersimonr economicassessmentmodelofruralandremotesatellitehemodialysisunits AT collisterdavid economicassessmentmodelofruralandremotesatellitehemodialysisunits AT rigattoclaudio economicassessmentmodelofruralandremotesatellitehemodialysisunits AT tangrinavdeep economicassessmentmodelofruralandremotesatellitehemodialysisunits AT komendapaul economicassessmentmodelofruralandremotesatellitehemodialysisunits |