A Cost Analysis of Haemodialysis and Peritoneal Dialysis for the Management of End-Stage Renal Failure At an Academic Hospital in Pretoria, South Africa

Letlhogonolo Makhele (), Moliehi Matlala (), Mncengeli Sibanda (), Antony P. Martin () and Brian Godman ()
Additional contact information
Letlhogonolo Makhele: Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University
Moliehi Matlala: Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University
Mncengeli Sibanda: Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University
Antony P. Martin: University of Liverpool Management School
Brian Godman: Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University

PharmacoEconomics - Open, 2019, vol. 3, issue 4, No 19, 641 pages

Abstract: Abstract Background Haemodialysis (HD) and peritoneal dialysis (PD) are commonly used treatments for the management of patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The costs of managing these patients have grown in recent years with increasing rates of non-communicable diseases, which will adversely impact on national health budgets unless addressed. Currently, there is limited knowledge of the costs of ESRD within the public healthcare system in South Africa. Objective The aim of this study was to examine the direct costs of HD and PD in South Africa from a healthcare provider’s perspective. Methods A prospective, observational study was undertaken at a leading public hospital in South Africa. A micro-costing approach was applied to estimate healthcare costs using 46 adult patients with ESRD who had been receiving HD and PD for at least 3 months. Results The highest proportion of patients (35%) were aged 40–50 years. Patients aged 29–39 years were mostly on HD (28% vs. 21% on PD) while those aged 51–59 years mostly used PD (29% vs. 16% on HD). The average age of patients on HD and PD were 41 and 42 years, respectively. Fixed costs were the principal cost driver for HD ($16,231.45) while variable costs were the principal cost driver for PD (US$20,488.79). The annual cost of HD per patient (US$31,993.12) was higher than PD (US$25,282.00 per patient), even though the difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.816). Conclusion HD costs more than PD from the provider’s perspective. These cost estimates may be useful for carrying out future cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses in South Africa.

Date: 2019
References: View references in EconPapers View complete reference list from CitEc
Citations:

Downloads: (external link)
http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s41669-019-0124-5 Abstract (text/html)

Related works:
This item may be available elsewhere in EconPapers: Search for items with the same title.

Export reference: BibTeX RIS (EndNote, ProCite, RefMan) HTML/Text

Persistent link: https://EconPapers.repec.org/RePEc:spr:pharmo:v:3:y:2019:i:4:d:10.1007_s41669-019-0124-5

Ordering information: This journal article can be ordered from
http://www.springer.com/adis/journal/41669

DOI: 10.1007/s41669-019-0124-5

Access Statistics for this article

PharmacoEconomics - Open is currently edited by Timothy Wrightson and Christopher Carswell

More articles in PharmacoEconomics - Open from Springer
Bibliographic data for series maintained by Sonal Shukla () and Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing ().