Economic evaluation of continuous renal replacement therapy in acute renal failure

International Journal of Technology Assessment in Health Care

Volumn 25, Issue 3, 2009, Pages 331-338

  Klarenbach, Scott ^a   Manns, Braden ^b   Pannu, Neesh ^a   Clement, Fiona M ^b   Wiebe, Natasha ^a   Tonelli, Marcello ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF ALBERTA   (Canada)

^b UNIVERSITY OF CALGARY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Costs and cost analysis; Decision support techniques; Kidney failure acute; Kidney failure chronic; Renal replacement therapy

Indexed keywords

CASE ANALYSIS; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; CLINICAL TRIAL; COST ANALYSIS; CRITICAL CARE; CRITICALLY-ILL PATIENTS; DECISION SUPPORT TECHNIQUES; DIALYSIS THERAPY; ECONOMIC EVALUATIONS; HEALTH OUTCOMES; HIGH DOSE; HIGH QUALITY; KIDNEY FAILURE-CHRONIC; MARKOV MODEL; OPTIMAL METHODS; RENAL FAILURE; RENAL REPLACEMENT THERAPIES; SYSTEMATIC REVIEW;

COST ACCOUNTING; COST EFFECTIVENESS; COSTS; DECISION SUPPORT SYSTEMS; DIALYSIS; HEALTH RISKS; MARKOV PROCESSES; QUALITY ASSURANCE; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS;

COST BENEFIT ANALYSIS;

ACUTE KIDNEY FAILURE; ADULT; ANALYSIS; CLINICAL ASSESSMENT; CLINICAL EFFECTIVENESS; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTINUOUS RENAL REPLACEMENT THERAPY; CONTROLLED STUDY; CONVALESCENCE; COST EFFECTIVENESS ANALYSIS; CRITICALLY ILL PATIENT; ECONOMIC EVALUATION; HEALTH; HEALTH CARE COST; HEMODIALYSIS; HUMAN; INTENSIVE CARE; INTERVENTION STUDY; KIDNEY; LONG TERM CARE; MODEL; MORTALITY; OUTCOME ASSESSMENT; PROBABILITY; REVIEW; RISK; SENSITIVITY ANALYSIS; TREATMENT DURATION; ARTICLE; CANADA; CRITICAL ILLNESS; ECONOMICS; META ANALYSIS; MIDDLE AGED; RENAL REPLACEMENT THERAPY;

CANADA; CRITICAL ILLNESS; HUMANS; KIDNEY FAILURE, ACUTE; MARKOV CHAINS; META-ANALYSIS AS TOPIC; MIDDLE AGED; RENAL REPLACEMENT THERAPY;

EID: 70350452267     PISSN: 02664623     EISSN: 14716348     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0266462309990134     Document Type: Review

References (21)

1. Bagshaw SM, Berthiaume LR, Delaney A, Bellomo R. Continuous versus intermittent renal replacement therapy for critically ill patients with acute kidney injury: Ameta-analysis. Crit Care Med. 2008;36:610-617.
2. Bagshaw SM, Laupland KB, Doig CJ, et al. Prognosis for longterm survival and renal recovery in critically ill patients with severe acute renal failure: A population-based study. Crit Care. 2005;9:R700-R709.
3. Berbece AN, Richardson RM. Sustained low-efficiency dialysis in the ICU: Cost, anticoagulation, and solute removal. Kidney Int. 2006;70:963-968.
4. Briggs AH, Goeree R, Blackhouse G, O'Brien BJ. Probabilistic analysis of cost-effectiveness models: Choosing between treatment strategies for gastroesophageal reflux disease. Med Decis Making. 2002;22:290-308.
5. Canadian Agency forDrugs and Technologies in Health. Guidelines for the economic evaluation of health technologies: Canada. 3rd ed. Ottawa: CADTH; 2006.
6. Claxton K, Sculpher M, McCabe C, et al. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis for nice technology assessment: Not an optional extra. Health Econ. 2005;14:339-347.
7. Drummond MF, Jefferson TO. Guidelines for authors and peer reviewers of economic submissions to the BMJ. The BMJ Economic Evaluation Working Party. BMJ. 1996;313:275-283.
8. Hamel MB, Phillips RS, Davis RB, et al. Outcomes and costeffectiveness of initiating dialysis and continuing aggressive care in seriously ill hospitalized adults. SUPPORT Investigators. Study to understand prognoses and preferences for outcomes and risks of treatments. Ann Intern Med. 1997;127:195-202.
9. Laupacis A, Keown P, Plus N, et al. A study of the quality of life and cost-utility of renal transplantation. Kidney Int. 1996;50:235-242.
10. Lee H, Manns B, Taub K, et al. Cost analysis of ongoing care of patients with end-stage renal disease: The impact of dialysis modality and dialysis access. Am J Kidney Dis. 2002;40:611-622.
11. Manns B, Johnson JA, Taub K, Mortis G, Ghali WA, Donaldson C. Quality of life in patients treated with hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis: What are the important determinants? Clin Nephrol. 2003;60:341-351.
12. Manns B, Doig CJ, Lee H, et al. Cost of acute renal failure requiring dialysis in the intensive care unit: Clinical and resource implications of renal recovery. Crit Care Med. 2003;31:449-455.
13. McCabe C, Dixon S. Testing the validity of cost-effectiveness models. Pharmacoeconomics. 2000;17:501-513.
14. Mehta RL, Chertow GM. In critically ill patients with acute renal failure, outcomes, not dollars, should drive modality choice. Crit Care Med. 2003;31:644-646.
15. Mehta RL, McDonald B, Gabbai FB, et al. A randomized clinical trial of continuous versus intermittent dialysis for acute renal failure. Kidney Int. 2001;60:1154-1163.
16. Noseworthy TW, Konopad E, Shustack A, Johnston R, Grace M. Cost accounting of adult intensive care: Methods and human and capital inputs. Crit Care Med. 1996;24:1168-1172.
17. Palevsky PM, Zhang JH, O'Connor TZ, et al. Intensity of renal support in critically ill patients with acute kidney injury. N Engl J Med. 2008;359:7-20.
18. Pannu N, Klarenbach S, Wiebe N, et al. Renal replacement therapy in patientswith acute renal failure:Asystematic review. JAMA. 2008;299:793-805.
19. Vinsonneau C, Camus C, Combes A, et al. Continuous venovenous haemodiafiltration versus intermittent haemodialysis for acute renal failure in patients with multiple-organ dysfunction syndrome: A multicentre randomised trial. Lancet 2006;368:379-385.
20. Vitale C, Bagnis C,Marangella M, et al. Cost analysis of blood purification in intensive care units: continuous versus intermittent hemodiafiltration. J Nephrol. 2003;16:572-579.
21. Weinstein MC, O'Brien B, Hornberger J, et al. Principles of good practice for decision analytic modeling in health-care evaluation: Report of the ISPOR Task Force on Good Research Practices-Modeling Studies. Value Health. 2003;6:9-17.