ECONOMIC EVALUATION OF DIFFERENT TREATMENT MODALITIES IN ACUTE KIDNEY INJURY

Author(s)

De Smedt D1, Elseviers M2, Lins R2, Annemans L31Ghent University, Gent, Belgium, 2University of Antwerp, Wilrijk, Belgium, 3Ghent University - Brussels University, Ghent, Belgium

OBJECTIVES: Major controversy exists regarding the optimal treatment strategy in Acute Kidney Injury (AKI). The purpose of this study was to assess the incremental cost-effectiveness of continuous (CRRT) versus intermittent renal replacement therapy (IRRT) and conservative (CONS) AKI treatment in Belgium. METHODS: An area under the curve model was used, whereby patients are simulated using time-to-event data (survival analysis), combined with daily direct medical costs. Data were derived from the multi-centre SHARF4 study in which the three treatment modalities for AKI were compared. A time horizon of 2 years, starting from the admission to the hospital, was considered. Utility data were obtained from SF-36 assessment at 2 years and from literature data on in-hospital utility RESULTS: Analyses indicated that mortality rates, cost and length of stay differed significantly between treatment mode during hospitalization. The mortality rate and the cost per day during the post-discharge follow-up period showed no significant difference between the treatment modes. Utility values, which improved gradually after admission to the hospital, revealed no significant differences between the three treatment strategies. Conservative treatment was associated with a 2-year cost of €34,090 and 0.49 QALYs. The CRRT was the most expensive therapy with a cost of €51,664 leading to 0.52 QALYs. The cost and QALYs associated with IRRT were €43,711 and 0.46. The ICER of CRRT versus IRRT was €131,604/QALY, while the  ICER of CRRT versus CONS amounted to €651,318/QALY. Additionally the conservative treatment dominated IRRT. Sensitivity analysis – tornado diagram – confirmed the robustness of the results. CONCLUSIONS: This study has indicated that the most expensive treatment (CRRT) associated with an incremental cost of approximately €7952 generates only a minor increase in QALYs of 0.06 compared to IRRT. Additionally the results revealed that IRRT was dominated by CONS. From a health economic perspective conservative therapy seems to be the preferred treatment strategy.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2010-11, ISPOR Europe 2010, Prague, Czech Republic

Value in Health, Vol. 13, No. 7 (November 2010)

Code

PUK23

Topic

Economic Evaluation

Topic Subcategory

Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis

Disease

Urinary/Kidney Disorders

Explore Related HEOR by Topic


Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×