2628 A haemodialysis patient-centred model of care with a multidisciplinary programme: what is its clinical and health efficiency impact?

• Published in: Nephrology, dialysis, transplantation Vol. 39; no. Supplement_1
• Main Authors: Martínez-Vaquera, Shaira, Sorribes, MaPaz, Martínez-Sánchez, Teresa, de León, Ignacio Ponce, Martínez-Pérez, Oscar, Díaz-Cuervo, Helena, Cuervo, Jesús, Macário, Fernando
• Format: Journal Article
• Language: English
• Published: 23.05.2024
• ISSN: 0931-0509; 1460-2385
• DOI: 10.1093/ndt/gfae069.816

Abstract Background and Aims Chronic kidney disease (CKD) constitutes a public health concern due to its notable morbidity & mortality and associated costs. The Patient Care Coordination program (PCC) provides comprehensive and personalized care to haemodialysis (HD) patients. This study evaluated the cost-effectiveness of PCC compared to standard of care (SoC). Method The study included patients in 9 HD clinics (5 PCC, 4 SoC) in Catalonia, Spain, in 2020-2021. A comparative effectiveness evaluation was conducted to compare change in Individual Patient Performance Score (IPPS, score 0-100, evaluates parameters such as vascular access, adequacy of HD, anaemia, mineral bone disease, arterial hypertension, nutrition/hydration status) and number of hospitalisations of PCC patients vs SoC during the first year in the program. Instrumental variables (IV) regression analysis was performed to address potential confounding; number of interactions with program specialists was a valid IV to estimate degree of PCC use. An incremental cost-effectiveness analysis (iCEA) through microsimulation was performed using the effectiveness data from the previous step, population data from the renal patient registry of Catalonia, and the cost of hospitalisations obtained from the Public Health System. Results 127 patients in PCC and 363 patients in SoC were included. The degree of PCC use had a positive impact on IPPS variation during the first year of the program (p = 0.012). In the iCEA the PCC program resulted in a mean gain of 3.4 additional IPPS points, a reduction of 0.2 hospitalisations per patient, and reduced mean costs of €1,265 per patient in the first year compared to SoC, resulting to be a dominant alternative (Fig. 1). Conclusion The holistic and interdisciplinary approach to the patient has further highlighted the relevance of programme use and not only belonging to the programme in achieving clinical goals. The PCC program represents thus a dominant alternative, with greater effectiveness and total cost savings that could sum up to €5.5 million per year in the region due to reduced hospitalizations. This approach may be an alternative to address the challenges of CKD and optimise the allocation of healthcare resources.