Dataset Information

Association of Scheduled vs Emergency-Only Dialysis With Health Outcomes and Costs in Undocumented Immigrants With End-stage Renal Disease.

ABSTRACT: Importance:In 40 of 50 US states, scheduled dialysis is withheld from undocumented immigrants with end-stage renal disease (ESRD); instead, they receive intermittent emergency-only dialysis to treat life-threatening manifestations of ESRD. However, the comparative effectiveness of scheduled dialysis vs emergency-only dialysis and the influence of treatment on health outcomes, utilization, and costs is uncertain. Objective:To compare the effectiveness of scheduled vs emergency-only dialysis with regard to health outcomes, utilization, and costs in undocumented immigrants with ESRD. Design, Setting, and Participants:Observational cohort study of 181 eligible adults with ESRD receiving emergency-only dialysis in Dallas, Texas, who became newly eligible and applied for private commercial health insurance in February 2015; 105 received coverage and were enrolled in scheduled dialysis; 76 were not enrolled in insurance for nonclinical reasons (eg, lack of capacity at a participating outpatient dialysis center) and remained uninsured, receiving emergency-only dialysis. We examined data on eligible persons during a 6-month period prior to enrollment (baseline period, August 1, 2014-January 31, 2015) until 12 months after enrollment (follow-up period, March 1, 2015-February 29, 2016), with an intervening 1-month washout period (February 2015). All participants were undocumented immigrants; self-reported data on immigration status was collected from Parkland Hospital electronic health records. Exposures:Enrollment in private health insurance coverage and scheduled dialysis. Main Outcomes and Measures:We used enrollment in health insurance and scheduled dialysis to estimate the influence of scheduled dialysis on 1-year mortality, utilization, and health care costs, using a propensity score-adjusted, intention-to-treat approach, including time-to-event analyses for mortality, difference-in-differences (DiD) negative binomial regression analyses for utilization, and DiD gamma generalized linear regression for health care costs. Results:Of 181 eligible adults with ESRD, 105 (65 men, 40 women; mean age, 45 years) received scheduled dialysis and 76 (38 men, 38 women; mean age, 52 years) received emergency-only dialysis. Compared with emergency-only dialysis, scheduled dialysis was significantly associated with reduced mortality (3% vs 17%, P = .001; absolute risk reduction, 14%; number needed to treat, 7; adjusted hazard ratio, 4.6; 95% CI, 1.2-18.2; P = .03), adjusted emergency department visits (-5.2 vs +1.1 visits/mo; DiD, -6.2; P < .001), adjusted hospitalizations (-2.1 vs -0.5 hospitalizations/6 months; DiD, -1.6; P < .001), adjusted hospital days (-9.2 vs +0.8 days/6 months; DiD, -9.9; P = .007), and adjusted costs (-$4316 vs +$1452 per person per month; DiD, -$5768; P < .001). Conclusions and Relevance:In this study, scheduled dialysis was significantly associated with reduced 1-year mortality, health care utilization, and costs compared with emergency-only dialysis. Scheduled dialysis should be the universal standard of care for all individuals with ESRD in the United States.

SUBMITTER: Nguyen OK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6439652 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Undocumented immigrants with end-stage renal disease have variable access to hemodialysis in the United States despite evidence-based standards for frequency of dialysis care.To determine whether mortality and health care use differs among undocumented immigrants who receive emergency-only hemodialysis vs standard hemodialysis (3 times weekly at a health care center).A retrospective cohort study was conducted of undocumented immigrants with incident end-stage renal disease who initiated emergency-only hemodialysis (Denver Health, Denver, Colorado, and Harris Health, Houston, Texas) or standard (Zuckerberg San Francisco General Hospital, San Francisco, California) hemodialysis between January 1, 2007, and July 15, 2014.Access to emergency-only hemodialysis vs standard hemodialysis.The primary outcome was mortality. Secondary outcomes were health care use (acute care days and ambulatory care visits) and rates of bacteremia. Outcomes were adjusted for propensity to undergo emergency hemodialysis vs standard hemodialysis.A total of 211 undocumented patients (86 women and 125 men; mean [SD] age, 46.5 [14.6] years; 42 from the standard hemodialysis group and 169 from the emergency-only hemodialysis group) initiated hemodialysis during the study period. Patients receiving standard hemodialysis were more likely to initiate hemodialysis with an arteriovenous fistula or graft and had higher albumin and hemoglobin levels than patients receiving emergency-only hemodialysis. Adjusting for propensity score, the mean 3-year relative hazard of mortality among patients who received emergency-only hemodialysis was nearly 5-fold (hazard ratio, 4.96; 95% CI, 0.93-26.45; P?=?.06) greater compared with patients who received standard hemodialysis. Mean 5-year relative hazard of mortality for patients who received emergency-only hemodialysis was more than 14-fold (hazard ratio, 14.13; 95% CI, 1.24-161.00; P?=?.03) higher than for those who received standard hemodialysis after adjustment for propensity score. The number of acute care days for patients who received emergency-only hemodialysis was 9.81 times (95% CI, 6.27-15.35; P?<?.001) the expected number of days for patients who had standard hemodialysis after adjustment for propensity score. Ambulatory care visits for patients who received emergency-only hemodialysis were 0.31 (95% CI, 0.21-0.46; P?<?.001) times less than the expected number of days for patients who received standard hemodialysis.Undocumented immigrants with end-stage renal disease treated with emergency-only hemodialysis have higher mortality and spend more days in the hospital than those receiving standard hemodialysis. States and cities should consider offering standard hemodialysis to undocumented immigrants.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:Serum albumin is a marker of malnutrition and inflammation and has been demonstrated as a strong predictor of mortality in chronic kidney disease (CKD) and end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients. Yet, whether serum albumin levels in late-stage CKD are associated with adverse outcomes after the transition to ESRD is unknown. We hypothesize that lower levels and a decline in serum albumin in late-stage CKD are associated with higher risk of mortality and hospitalization rates 1 year after transition to ESRD. DESIGN AND METHODS:This retrospective cohort study included 29,124 US veterans with advanced CKD transitioning to ESRD between 2007 and 2015. We evaluated the association of pre-ESRD (91 days before transition) serum albumin with 12-month post-ESRD all-cause, cardiovascular, and infection-related mortalities and hospitalization rates as well as the association of 1-year pre-ESRD albumin slope and 12-month post-ESRD mortality using hierarchical multivariable adjustments. RESULTS:There was a negative linear association between serum albumin and all-cause mortality, such that risk doubled (hazard ratio [HR]: 2.07, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.87, 2.28) for patients with the lowest serum albumin <2.8 g/dL (ref: ?4.0 g/dL) after full adjustment. A consistent relationship was observed between serum albumin and cardiovascular and infection-related mortality, and hospitalization outcomes. An increase in serum albumin of >0.25 g/dL/year was associated with reduced mortality risk (HR: 0.76, 95% CI: 0.63, 0.91) compared with a slight decline in albumin (ref: >-0.25 to 0 g/dL/year), whereas a decline more than 0.5 g/dL/year was associated with a 55% higher risk in mortality (HR: 1.55, 95% CI: 1.43, 1.68) in fully adjusted models. CONCLUSIONS:Lower pre-ESRD serum albumin was associated with higher post-ESRD all-cause, cardiovascular, and infection-related mortalities and hospitalization rates. Declining serum albumin levels in the pre-ESRD period were also associated with worse 12-month post-ESRD mortality.

Project description:ImportanceIndividuals of undocumented immigration status with kidney failure face barriers to receiving transplants due to lack of health insurance despite no regulatory barriers. Little is known about the perspectives on kidney transplant among individuals with undocumented immigration status with kidney failure who relied on emergency hemodialysis.ObjectiveTo examine the overall experiences of transplant among transplant recipients of undocumented immigration status who previously relied on emergency hemodialysis and their family caregivers.Design, setting, and participantsIn this qualitative study, semistructured 1-to-1 interviews were conducted with transplant recipients who had previously received emergency hemodialysis and transitioned to scheduled dialysis and their primary caregivers living in Denver, Colorado, between May 1, 2022, and March 31, 2023, in English or Spanish.Main outcomes and measuresThemes and subthemes regarding the experience of transplant as an undocumented immigrant previously receiving emergency hemodialysis were identified. Interview transcripts were translated, deidentified, and then analyzed using thematic analysis.ResultsA total of 25 participants including 15 transplant recipients (5 [33.3%] female and 10 [66.7%] male; mean [SD] age, 49.5 [9.8] years) and 10 caregivers (7 [70.0%] female and 3 [30.0%] male; mean [SD] age, 44.5 [22.3] years) participated. Six themes were reported: limited kidney replacement therapy education while receiving emergency hemodialysis (lack of awareness of kidney disease and treatment options and discriminatory kidney replacement therapy education due to immigration status), hope for transplant once receiving scheduled dialysis (prospect of transplant through scheduled dialysis, family and quality of life as transplant motivators), transplant education and health insurance after transition to scheduled dialysis (inadequate transplant education in dialysis clinic, peer-to-peer transplant education, and peer-to-peer communication regarding availability of private health insurance), uncertainty during transplant evaluation (difficulty navigating the evaluation and wait-listing process, lack of communication regarding timeline, and concern for family limiting living donation), posttransplant improvements (ability to work after transplant is critically important given immigration status, autonomy with transplant improves mental health, and vigilance in maintaining transplant), and transplant facilitators (self-advocacy, spirituality and optimism, and peer support).Conclusions and relevanceThis qualitative study of transplant recipients of undocumented immigration status and their caregivers found that individuals formerly receiving emergency dialysis are excluded from education and access to transplant, and peer support throughout the transplant process helped with education and motivation to pursue transplant. These findings may be used to implement improvements in access to support and education for patients of undocumented immigration status with kidney failure, especially in areas where scheduled dialysis is not available.

Project description:Deceased-donor renal transplant (DDRT) is an expensive and potentially risky health intervention with the prospect of improved life and lower long-term costs compared with dialysis. Due to the increasing shortage of kidneys and the associated rise of transplantation costs, certain patient groups may not benefit from transplantation in a cost-effective manner compared with dialysis. The objective of this systematic review was to provide a comprehensive synthesis of evidence on the cost-effectiveness of DDRT relative to dialysis to treat adults with end-stage renal disease and patient-, donor-, and system-level factors that may modify the conclusion. A systematic search of articles was conducted on major databases including MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, EconLit, and the Health Economic Evaluations Database. Eligible articles were restricted to those published in 2001 or thereafter. Two reviewers independently assessed the suitability of studies and excluded studies that focused on recipients with age <18 years old and those of a living-donor or multiorgan transplant. We show that while DDRT is generally a cost-effective treatment relative to dialysis at conventional willingness-to-pay thresholds, a range of drivers including older patient age, comorbidity, and long wait times significantly reduce the benefit of DDRT while escalating healthcare costs. These findings suggest that the performance of DDRT on older patients with comorbidities should be carefully evaluated to avoid adverse results as evidence suggests that it is not cost-effective. Delayed transplantation may reduce the economic benefits of transplant which necessitates targeted policies that aim to shorten wait times. More recent findings have demonstrated that transplantation using high-risk donors may be a cost-effective and promising alternative to dialysis in the face of a lack of organ availability and fiscal constraints. This review highlights key concepts of health economic evaluations and the relevance of cost-effectiveness to inform care and decision-making in renal programs.

Dataset Information

Association of Scheduled vs Emergency-Only Dialysis With Health Outcomes and Costs in Undocumented Immigrants With End-stage Renal Disease.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets