OBJECTIVES: A major challenge for haemodialysis (HD) centres is to maximise efficiency in care provision while maintaining high standards of care. Our objective was to document health care professional (HCP) time for renal anaemia management for both shorter-acting erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) and Mircera, a continuous erythropoiesis receptor activator (C.E.R.A.) once monthly (Q4W), and model time savings with the use of Q4W C.E.R.A. METHODS: This descriptive multi-centre Time and Motion (T&M) study was conducted in 13 centres in Italy. The time spent on frequent anaemia management-related tasks (preparation, distribution, and injection) was recorded for both ESA and C.E.R.A. groups in each centre by trained observers. Time/patient/session was used to calculate time/patient/year, time/centre/year and modelling of potential time savings of a 100% uptake of C.E.R.A. A Random intercept generalized linear mixed effect model assuming gamma distribution with log link function to account for the centre clustering effect was fitted for each task separately. RESULTS: In all centres, more than 80% of an average 86 ESRD patients received ESA treatment. The average number of ESA injections/patient/year, weighted by type of ESA, frequency and route of administration, was 89 (range: 33-150). The average uptake of C.E.R.A. was 26% (range 11-41%). The mean annual reduction in the number of ESA administrations following conversion to C.E.R.A. was 77 (21-138). Average time per patient HD session was 1.54 minutes for ESA (95% CI: 1.17-1.90) vs. 1.64 minutes for C.E.R.A. (95% CI: 1.57-2.02). Estimated time/patient/year was 137 min (range: 65-277) for ESA and 20 min for C.E.R.A. (range: 5-51). Assuming a 100% uptake of Q4W C.E.R.A. maintenance therapy, annual time savings/centre for frequent anaemia management tasks would be 86% (range: 62-95%). CONCLUSIONS: Substantial annual time savings on frequent anaemia management-related tasks were found in HD centres in Italy with 100% uptake of Q4W C.E.R.A. maintenance therapy.