Emergency-Only Hemodialysis Policies: Ethical Critique and Avenues for Reform

• Published in: The Journal of law, medicine & ethics Vol. 48; no. 3; pp. 527 - 534
• Main Authors: Lavingia, Richa, Raghavan, Rajeev, Morain, Stephanie R.
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: Los Angeles, CA SAGE Publications 01.09.2020; Cambridge University Press
• Subjects: Burnout; Catheters; Charities; Citizenship; Cost control; Emergency medical care; Emergency Service, Hospital - ethics; Ethics; Failure; Health care expenditures; Health Policy - legislation & jurisprudence; Health services; Health Services Accessibility - ethics; Hemodialysis; Hospitalization; Hospitals; Humans; Immigrants; Insurance coverage; Kidney Failure, Chronic - ethnology; Kidney Failure, Chronic - therapy; Kidney transplants; Medicaid; Medical ethics; Medicare; Mortality; Nosocomial infections; Obligations; Patient Protection & Affordable Care Act 2010-US; Patient safety; Patient satisfaction; Peritoneal dialysis; Physicians; Reforms; Renal Dialysis - ethics; Undocumented immigrants; Undocumented Immigrants - legislation & jurisprudence; United States; United States; United States > US
• ISSN: 1073-1105; 1748-720X; 1748-720X
• DOI: 10.1177/1073110520958877

An estimated 6,500 undocumented immigrants in the United States have been diagnosed with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). These individuals are ineligible for the federal insurance program that covers dialysis and/or transplantation for citizens, and consequently are subject to local or state policies regarding the provision of healthcare. In 76% of states, undocumented immigrants are ineligible to receive scheduled outpatient dialysis treatments, and typically receive dialysis only when presenting to the emergency center with severe life-threatening symptoms. ‘Emergency-only hemodialysis’ (EOHD) is associated with higher healthcare costs, higher mortality, and longer hospitalizations. In this paper, we present an ethical critique of existing federal policy. We argue that EOHD represents a failure of fiduciary and professional obligations, contributes to moral distress, and undermines physician obligations to be good stewards of medical resources. We then explore potential avenues for reform based upon policies introduced at the state level. We argue that, while reform at the federal level would ultimately be a more sustainable long-term solution, state-based policy reforms can help mitigate the ethical shortcomings of EOHD.