IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0177436.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Economic evaluation of policy options for dialysis in end-stage renal disease patients under the universal health coverage in Indonesia

Author

Listed:
  • Afiatin
  • Levina Chandra Khoe
  • Erna Kristin
  • Lusiana Siti Masytoh
  • Eva Herlinawaty
  • Pitsaphun Werayingyong
  • Mardiati Nadjib
  • Sudigdo Sastroasmoro
  • Yot Teerawattananon

Abstract

Objectives: This study aims to assess the value for money and budget impact of offering hemodialysis (HD) as a first-line treatment, or the HD-first policy, and the peritoneal dialysis (PD) first policy compared to a supportive care option in patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in Indonesia. Methods: A Markov model-based economic evaluation was performed using local and international data to quantify the potential costs and health-related outcomes in terms of life years (LYs) and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs). Three policy options were compared, i.e., the PD-first policy, HD-first policy, and supportive care. Results: The PD-first policy for ESRD patients resulted in 5.93 life years, equal to the HD-first policy, with a slightly higher QALY gained (4.40 vs 4.34). The total lifetime cost for a patient under the PD-first policy is around 700 million IDR, which is lower than the cost under the HD-first policy, i.e. 735 million IDR per patient. Compared to supportive care, the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the PD-first policy is 193 million IDR per QALY, while the HD-first policy resulted in 207 million IDR per QALY. Budget impact analysis indicated that the required budget for the PD-first policy is 43 trillion IDR for 53% coverage and 75 trillion IDR for 100% coverage in five years, which is less than the HD-first policy, i.e. 88 trillion IDR and 166 trillion IDR. Conclusions: The PD-first policy was found to be more cost-effective compared to the HD-first policy. Budget impact analysis provided evidence on the enormous financial burden for the country if the current practice, where HD dominates PD, continues for the next five years.

Suggested Citation

  • Afiatin & Levina Chandra Khoe & Erna Kristin & Lusiana Siti Masytoh & Eva Herlinawaty & Pitsaphun Werayingyong & Mardiati Nadjib & Sudigdo Sastroasmoro & Yot Teerawattananon, 2017. "Economic evaluation of policy options for dialysis in end-stage renal disease patients under the universal health coverage in Indonesia," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 12(5), pages 1-10, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0177436
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0177436
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177436
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0177436&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0177436?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Catrin Treharne & Frank Liu & Murat Arici & Lydia Crowe & Usman Farooqui, 2014. "Peritoneal Dialysis and In-Centre Haemodialysis: A Cost-Utility Analysis from a UK Payer Perspective," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 12(4), pages 409-420, August.
    2. de Wit, G.Ardine & Ramsteijn, Paul G & de Charro, Frank Th, 1998. "Economic evaluation of end stage renal disease treatment," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 44(3), pages 215-232, June.
    3. Just, Paul Michael & Riella, Miguel Carlos & Tschosik, Elizabeth Ann & Noe, Leslie Lyle & Bhattacharyya, Samir Kumar & de Charro, Frank, 2008. "Economic evaluations of dialysis treatment modalities," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(2-3), pages 163-180, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Naren Kumar Surendra & Mohd Rizal Abdul Manaf & Lai Seong Hooi & Sunita Bavanandan & Fariz Safhan Mohamad Nor & Shahnaz Shah Firdaus Khan & Ong Loke Meng & Abdul Halim Abdul Gafor, 2019. "Cost utility analysis of end stage renal disease treatment in Ministry of Health dialysis centres, Malaysia: Hemodialysis versus continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-16, October.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Renee Lévesque & Daniele Marcelli & Héloïse Cardinal & Marie-Line Caron & Muriel Grooteman & Michiel Bots & Peter Blankestijn & Menso Nubé & Aileen Grassmann & Bernard Canaud & Afschin Gandjour, 2015. "Cost-Effectiveness Analysis of High-Efficiency Hemodiafiltration Versus Low-Flux Hemodialysis Based on the Canadian Arm of the CONTRAST Study," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 13(6), pages 647-659, December.
    2. Kontodimopoulos, Nick & Niakas, Dimitris, 2008. "An estimate of lifelong costs and QALYs in renal replacement therapy based on patients' life expectancy," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(1), pages 85-96, April.
    3. Ellen Busink & Dana Kendzia & Fatih Kircelli & Sophie Boeger & Jovana Petrovic & Helen Smethurst & Stephen Mitchell & Christian Apel, 2023. "A systematic review of the cost-effectiveness of renal replacement therapies, and consequences for decision-making in the end-stage renal disease treatment pathway," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 24(3), pages 377-392, April.
    4. Wolfgang C. Winkelmayer & Milton C. Weinstein & Murray A. Mittleman & Robert J. Glynn & Joseph S. Pliskin, 2002. "Health Economic Evaluations: The Special Case of End-Stage Renal Disease Treatment," Medical Decision Making, , vol. 22(5), pages 417-430, October.
    5. Mohsen Yaghoubi & Sonya Cressman & Louisa Edwards & Steven Shechter & Mary M. Doyle-Waters & Paul Keown & Ruth Sapir-Pichhadze & Stirling Bryan, 2023. "A Systematic Review of Kidney Transplantation Decision Modelling Studies," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 21(1), pages 39-51, January.
    6. Sigrid M Mohnen & Manon J M van Oosten & Jeanine Los & Martijn J H Leegte & Kitty J Jager & Marc H Hemmelder & Susan J J Logtenberg & Vianda S Stel & Leona Hakkaart-van Roijen & G Ardine de Wit, 2019. "Healthcare costs of patients on different renal replacement modalities – Analysis of Dutch health insurance claims data," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(8), pages 1-14, August.
    7. Alexander V van Schoonhoven & Judith J Gout-Zwart & Marijke J S de Vries & Antoinette D I van Asselt & Evgeni Dvortsin & Pepijn Vemer & Job F M van Boven & Maarten J Postma, 2019. "Costs of clinical events in type 2 diabetes mellitus patients in the Netherlands: A systematic review," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(9), pages 1-22, September.
    8. Naren Kumar Surendra & Mohd Rizal Abdul Manaf & Lai Seong Hooi & Sunita Bavanandan & Fariz Safhan Mohamad Nor & Shahnaz Shah Firdaus Khan & Ong Loke Meng & Abdul Halim Abdul Gafor, 2019. "Cost utility analysis of end stage renal disease treatment in Ministry of Health dialysis centres, Malaysia: Hemodialysis versus continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 14(10), pages 1-16, October.
    9. Anne-Line Couillerot-Peyrondet & Cléa Sambuc & Yoël Sainsaulieu & Cécile Couchoud & Isabelle Bongiovanni-Delarozière, 2017. "A comprehensive approach to assess the costs of renal replacement therapy for end-stage renal disease in France: the importance of age, diabetes status, and clinical events," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 18(4), pages 459-469, May.
    10. Cleemput, Irina & De Laet, Chris, 2013. "Analysis of the costs of dialysis and the effects of an incentive mechanism for low-cost dialysis modalities," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 110(2), pages 172-179.
    11. Thomas W Ferguson & James Zacharias & Simon R Walker & David Collister & Claudio Rigatto & Navdeep Tangri & Paul Komenda, 2015. "An Economic Assessment Model of Rural and Remote Satellite Hemodialysis Units," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(8), pages 1-11, August.
    12. Bernadette Li & John Cairns & James Fotheringham & Rommel Ravanan, 2016. "Predicting hospital costs for patients receiving renal replacement therapy to inform an economic evaluation," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 17(6), pages 659-668, July.
    13. Arim Shukri & Thomas Mettang & Benjamin Scheckel & Isabell Schellartz & Dusan Simic & Nadine Scholten & Martin Müller & Stephanie Stock, 2022. "Hemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis in Germany from a Health Economic View—A Propensity Score Matched Analysis," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(21), pages 1-11, October.
    14. Braden Manns & David Meltzer & Ken Taub & Cam Donaldson, 2003. "Illustrating the impact of including future costs in economic evaluations: an application to end‐stage renal disease care," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 12(11), pages 949-958, November.
    15. Joseph Menzin & Lisa Lines & Daniel Weiner & Peter Neumann & Christine Nichols & Lauren Rodriguez & Irene Agodoa & Tracy Mayne, 2011. "A Review of the Costs and Cost Effectiveness of Interventions in Chronic Kidney Disease," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 29(10), pages 839-861, October.
    16. Sergio Iannazzo & Michela Carsi & Silvia Chiroli, 2012. "A cost-utility analysis of cinacalcet in secondary hyperparathyroidism in five European countries," Applied Health Economics and Health Policy, Springer, vol. 10(2), pages 127-138, March.
    17. Steef Redeker & Sohal Ismail & Hester V. Eeren & Emma K. Massey & Willem Weimar & Mark Oppe & Jan Busschbach, 2022. "A dynamic Markov model to assess the cost-effectiveness of the Kidney Team at Home intervention in The Netherlands," The European Journal of Health Economics, Springer;Deutsche Gesellschaft für Gesundheitsökonomie (DGGÖ), vol. 23(4), pages 597-606, June.
    18. Gijs Van de Wetering & Willem H. Woertman & Eddy M. M. Adang, 2012. "A model to correct for short‐run inefficiencies in economic evaluations in healthcare," Health Economics, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 21(3), pages 270-281, March.
    19. Mario Eandi & Lorenzo Pradelli & Sergio Iannazzo & Silvia Chiroli & Giuseppe Pontoriero, 2010. "Economic Evaluation of Cinacalcet in the Treatment of Secondary Hyperparathyroidism in Italy," PharmacoEconomics, Springer, vol. 28(11), pages 1041-1054, November.
    20. Just, Paul Michael & Riella, Miguel Carlos & Tschosik, Elizabeth Ann & Noe, Leslie Lyle & Bhattacharyya, Samir Kumar & de Charro, Frank, 2008. "Economic evaluations of dialysis treatment modalities," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 86(2-3), pages 163-180, May.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0177436. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.