Dataset Information

A Cost-Effective Analysis of the CYCLE-HD Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

No formal cost-effectiveness analysis has been performed for programs of cycling exercise during dialysis (intradialytic cycling [IDC]). The objective of this analysis is to determine the effect of a 6-month program of IDC on health care costs.

Methods

This is a retrospective formal cost-effectiveness analysis of adult participants with end-stage kidney disease undertaking in-center maintenance hemodialysis enrolled in the CYCLE-HD trial. Data on hospital utilization, primary care consultations, and prescribed medications were extracted from medical records for the 6 months before, during, and after a 6-month program of thrice-weekly IDC. The cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from a health care service perspective and included the cost of implementing the IDC intervention. The base-case analyses included a 6-month "within trial" analysis and a 12-month "within and posttrial" analysis considering health care utilization and quality of life (QoL) outcomes.

Results

Data from the base-case within trial analysis, based on 109 participants (n = 56 control subjects and n = 53 IDC subjects) showed a reduction in health care utilization costs between groups, favoring the IDC group, and a 73% chance of IDC being cost-effective compared with control subjects at a willingness to pay of £20,000 and £30,000 per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained. When QoL data points were extrapolated forward to 12 months, the probability of IDC being cost-effective was 93% and 94% at £20,000 and £30,000 per QALY gained. Sensitivity analysis broadly confirms these findings.

Conclusion

A 6-month program of IDC is cost-effective and the implementation of these programs nationally should be a priority.

SUBMITTER: March DS

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8207470 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:Management of acute sore throat poses a significant burden on UK general practices, with almost 10% of registered patients attending their GP with sore throat every year. Nearly half of all patients presenting with acute sore throat are treated with antibiotics, despite their limited effect. In a recent systematic review we demonstrated that a single dose of steroids reduced the severity and time to resolution of sore throat. However, all of the trials included looked at the use of steroids alongside antibiotics and only one was in a primary care setting. This trial aims to assess the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of a single oral dose of corticosteroids on symptoms of sore throat in patients receiving either a delayed antibiotic prescription or no antibiotics at all in UK primary care.A double-blind, two arm, randomized, placebo controlled trial in adults (? 18 years of age) presenting to primary care with acute sore throat (<seven days). Participants are recruited on the day of presentation to their GP practice. GPs or nurses assess eligibility, record baseline clinical features and obtain a throat swab for bacterial culture. Participants are being randomized to treatment arms at a ratio of 1:1. Treatment arms will be stratified according to whether patients are being given a delayed antibiotic prescription or no antibiotic prescription and by recruiting centre (Oxford, Bristol or Southampton). Outcome data is being collected at 24 and 48 hours via text message or telephone call, from days 0 to 7 using a patient symptom diary and at one month via a GP notes review.This will be the first randomized controlled trial of oral corticosteroids in adults presenting to primary care with sore throat in the UK, and the first to examine the clinical and cost-effectiveness of oral corticosteroids for the treatment of sore throat in the absence of antibiotics.This trial is registered with Current Controlled Trials on 26 March 2013, registration number: ISRCTN17435450.

Project description:BackgroundFibroblast growth factor 23 (FGF23) is associated with left ventricular hypertrophy (LVH) in patients with chronic kidney disease, and calcimimetic therapy reduces plasma concentrations of FGF23. It remains unknown whether treatment with the calcimimetic etelcalcetide (ETL) reduces LVH in patients on hemodialysis.Methods/designThis single-blinded randomized trial of 12 months duration will test the effects of ETL compared with alfacalcidol on LVH and cardiac fibrosis in maintenance hemodialysis patients with secondary hyperparathyroidism. Both treatment regimens will be titrated to equally suppress secondary hyperparathyroidism while alfacalcidol treatment causes an increase and ETL a decrease in FGF23, respectively. Patients treated thrice weekly with hemodialysis for ≥ 3 months and ≤ 3 years with parathyroid hormone levels ≥ 300 pg/ml and LVH will be enrolled in the study. The primary study endpoint is change from baseline to 12 months in left ventricular mass index (LVMI; g/m2) measured by cardiac magnetic resonance imaging. Sample size calculations showed that 62 randomized patients will be necessary to detect a difference in LVMI of at least 20 g/m2 between the two groups at 12 months. Due to the strong association of volume overload and LVH, randomization will be stratified by residual kidney function, and regular body composition monitoring will be performed to control the volume status of patients. Study medication will be administered intravenously by the dialysis nurses after every hemodialysis session, thus omitting adherence issues. Secondary study endpoints are cardiac parameters measured by echocardiography, biomarker concentrations of bone metabolism (FGF23, vitamin D, parathyroid hormone, calcium, phosphate, s-Klotho), cardiac markers (pro-brain natriuretic peptide, pre- and postdialysis troponin T) and metabolites of the renin-angiotensin-aldosterone cascade (angiotensin I (Ang I), Ang II, Ang-(1-7), Ang-(1-5), Ang-(1-9), and aldosterone).DiscussionThe causal inference and pathophysiology of LVH regression by FGF23 reduction using calcimimetic treatment has not yet been shown. This intervention study has the potential to discover a new strategy for the treatment of cardiac hypertrophy and fibrosis in patients on maintenance hemodialysis. It might be speculated that successful treatment of cardiac morphology will also reduce the risk of cardiac death in this population.Trial registrationEuropean Clinical Trials Database, EudraCT number 2017-000222-35; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03182699 . Registered on.

Project description:BackgroundPatients receiving in-center hemodialysis experience disproportionate morbidity and incur high healthcare-related costs. Much of this cost stems from potentially avoidable hospitalizations. Peer mentorship has been used effectively to improve outcomes for patients with complex chronic diseases. We propose testing the efficacy of peer mentorship on hospitalization rates among patients receiving hemodialysis.MethodsThis is a multicenter parallel group randomized controlled pragmatic trial of patients treated at hemodialysis facilities in Bronx, NY and Nashville, TN. The study has two phases. Phase 1 will enroll and train 16 hemodialysis patients (10 in Bronx, NY and 6 in Nashville TN) to be mentors using a program focused on enhancing self-efficacy, dialysis self-management and autonomy-supportive communication skills. Phase 2 will enroll 200 high risk adults receiving hemodialysis (140 in Bronx, NY and 60 in Nashville, TN), half of whom will be randomized to intervention and half to usual care. Intervention participants are assigned to weekly telephone calls with trained mentors (see Phase 1) for a 3-month period. The primary outcome of Phase 1 will be engagement of mentors with training and change in knowledge scores and autonomy skills from pre- to post-training. The primary outcome of Phase 2 will be the composite count of ED visits and hospitalizations at the end of study follow-up in patient participants assigned to intervention as compared to those assigned to usual care. Secondary outcomes for Phase 2 include the change over the trial period in validated survey scores measuring perception of social support and self-efficacy, and dialysis adherence metrics, among intervention participants as compared to usual care participants.DiscussionThe PEER-HD study will test the feasibility and efficacy of a pragmatic peer-mentorship program designed for patients receiving hemodialysis on ED visit and hospitalization rates. If effective, peer-mentorship holds promise as a scalable patient-centered intervention to decrease hospital resource utilization, and by extension morbidity and cost, for patients receiving maintenance in-center hemodialysis.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT03595748 ; 7/23/2018.Trial sponsorNational Institutes of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Disease (NIDDK) 5R18DK118471.FundingFunding for this study was provided by the National Institutes of Diabetes, Digestive and Kidney Disease: R18DK118471.Study statusThis is an ongoing study and not complete. We are still collecting data for observational follow-up on participants.Related articlesNo related articles for this study have been submitted to any journal. The study sponsor and funders had no role in the design, analysis or interpretation of this data. The content is solely the responsibility of the authors and does not necessarily represent the official views of the National Institutes of Health.