The effect of dialysis chains on mortality among patients receiving hemodialysis

Privatization and Oligopolies of the Renal Replacement Therapy Sector on Contemporary Capitalism: A Systematic Review and the Brazilian Scenario

Worldwide the assistance on renal replacement therapy (RRT) is carried out mainly by private for-profit services and in a market with increase in mergers and acquisitions. The aim of this study was to conduct an integrative systematic review on privatization and oligopolies in the RRT sector in the context of contemporary capitalism. The inclusion criteria were scientific articles without language restrictions and that addressed the themes of oligopoly or privatization of RRT market. Studies published before 1990 were excluded. The exploratory search for publications was carried out on February 13, 2024 on the Virtual Health Library Regional Portal (VHL). Using the step-by-step of PRISMA flowchart, 34 articles were retrieved, of which 31 addressed the RRT sector in the United States and 26 compared for-profit dialysis units or those belonging to large organizations with non-profit or public ones. The main effects of privatization and oligopolies, evaluated by the studies, were: mortality, hospitalization, use of peritoneal dialysis and registration for kidney transplantation. When considering these outcomes, 19 (73%) articles showed worse results in private units or those belonging to large organizations, six (23%) studies were in favor of privatization or oligopolies and one study was neutral (4%). In summary, most of the articles included in this systematic review showed deleterious effects of oligopolization and privatization of the RRT sector on the patients served. Possible explanations for this result could be the presence of conflicts of interest in the RRT sector and the lack of incentive to implement the chronic kidney disease care line. The predominance of articles from a single nation may suggest that few countries have transparent mechanisms to monitor the quality of care and outcomes of patients on chronic dialysis.

Risk of Death among Dialysis Patients Treated at Hospital-Affiliated versus Free-Standing Facilities in the United States

Receipt of dialysis at hospital-affiliated facilities was associated with a higher risk of mortality compared with treatment at free-standing dialysis facilities. The differential mortality risk in free-standing versus hospital-affiliated facilities was more pronounced in non-Hispanic Black and Asian patients compared with other racial/ethnic groups.

Market Consolidation and Innovation in US Dialysis

While patients with end-stage kidney disease have benefited from innovations in clinical therapeutics and care delivery, these changes have been primarily incremental and have not fundamentally transformed care delivery. Dialysis markets are highly concentrated, which may impede innovation. Unique features of the dialysis industry that have contributed to consolidation can help to explain links between consolidation and innovation. We discuss these unique features and then provide a framework for considering the effects of consolidation on innovation in dialysis that focuses on the following economic considerations: (1) industry characteristics, composition, and stage of consolidation, (2) innovation characteristics and relative profitability, (3) the role of government regulation, and (4) innovation from smaller providers and new entrants. We present examples of how these considerations have influenced the adoption of alternative dialysis technologies such as peritoneal dialysis and erythropoietin-stimulating agents, and we discuss how consolidated markets can both help and hinder recent policy initiatives to transform dialysis care delivery. Only by considering these important drivers of consolidation, future efforts can be successful in transforming end-stage kidney disease care.

Mortality at For-Profit Versus Not-For-Profit Hemodialysis Centers: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to assess differences in risk-adjusted mortality rates between for-profit (FP) and not-for-profit (NFP) hemodialysis facilities. We searched 10 databases for studies published between January 2001 to December 2019 that compared mortality at private hemodialysis facilities. We included observational studies directly comparing adjusted mortality rates between FP and NFP private hemodialysis providers in any language or country. We excluded evaluations of dialysis facilities that changed their profit status, studies with overlapping data, and studies that failed to adjust for patient age and some measure of clinical severity. Pairs of reviewers independently screened all titles and abstracts and the full text of potentially eligible studies, abstracted data, and assessed risk of bias, resolving disagreement by discussion. We included nine observational studies of hemodialysis facilities representing 1,163,144 patient-years. In pooled random-effects meta-analysis, the odds ratio of mortality in FP relative to NFP facilities was 1.07 (95% CI 1.04-1.11). Patients at FP hemodialysis facilities have 7 percent greater odds of death annually than patients with similar risk profiles at NFP facilities. Approximately 3,800 excess deaths might be averted annually if U.S. FP hemodialysis operators matched NFP mortality rates.

The nephrology crystal ball: the medium-term future

In January 2019, the ERA-EDTA surveyed nephrologists with questions on kidney care and kidney research designed to explore comprehension of the impact of alterations to organization of renal care and of advancements in technology and knowledge of kidney disease. Eight hundred and twenty-five ERA-EDTA members, ∼13% of the whole ERA-EDTA membership, replied to an ad hoc questionnaire. More than half of the respondents argued that kidney centres will be increasingly owned by large dialysis providers, nearly a quarter of respondents felt that many medical aspects of dialysis will be increasingly overseen by non-nephrologists and a quarter (24%) also believed that the care and long-term follow-up of kidney transplant patients will be increasingly under the responsibility of transplant physicians caring for patients with any organ transplant. Nearly half of the participants (45%, n = 367) use fully electronic clinical files integrating the clinical ward, the outpatient clinics, the haemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis units, as well as transplantation. Smartphone-based self-management programmes for the care of chronic kidney disease (CKD) patients are scarcely applied (only 11% of surveyed nephrologists), but a substantial proportion of respondents (74%) are eager to know more about the potential usefulness of these apps. Finally, European nephrologists expressed a cautious optimism about the application of omic sciences to nephrology and on wearable and implantable kidneys, but their expectations for the medium term are limited.

Consolidation in dialysis Markets-Causes, consequences, and the role of policy

The dialysis industry is one of the most highly concentrated healthcare sectors in the United States. Despite decades of growth in the number of patients with end-stage renal disease and in the size of dialysis markets, two large dialysis organizations currently care for more than two-thirds of the dialysis population. Economies of scale, bargaining leverage with suppliers and private insurers, barriers to entry, and government regulations have contributed to highly concentrated dialysis markets by conferring advantages to larger organizations. Consolidated dialysis markets have coincided with both positive and negative trends in healthcare costs and outcomes. Costs per patient receiving dialysis have grown at a slower rate than per capita Medicare costs, while access to dialysis care remains available across a wide socioeconomic range. Mortality rates have declined despite a sicker dialysis patient population. Yet, concerns remain about the cost and quality of dialysis care. Evidence suggests that chain ownership, for profit status, and less market competition may negatively impact health outcomes. Future policies and innovations involving kidney health may temporarily disrupt consolidation. However, if the underlying mechanisms that contributed to past consolidation persist, dialysis markets may remain highly concentrated over the long term.

Conflicts of interest in dialysis: A barrier to policy reforms

Conflicts of interest involving physicians are commonplace in the US, occurring across many different specialties and subspecialties in a variety of clinical settings. In nephrology, two important scenarios in which conflicts of interest arise are dialysis facility joint venture (JV) arrangements and financial participation in End-stage Kidney Disease Seamless Care Organizations (ESCOs). Whether conflicts of interest occurring in either of these settings influence decision-making or patient care outcomes is not known due to a lack of transparent, publicly available information, and opportunities to conduct independent study. We discuss possible benefits and risks of nephrologist's financial participation in JVs and ESCOs and possible mechanisms for disclosure and reporting of such arrangements as well as risk mitigation.

Association of Hospitalization and Mortality Among Patients Initiating Dialysis With Hemodialysis Facility Ownership and Acquisitions

IMPORTANCE

Mergers and acquisitions among health care institutions are increasingly common, and dialysis markets have undergone several decades of mergers and acquisitions.

OBJECTIVE

To examine the outcomes of hemodialysis facility acquisitions independent of associated changes in market competition resulting from acquisitions.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Cohort study using difference-in-differences (DID) analyses to compare changes in health outcomes over time among in-center US dialysis facilities that were acquired by a hemodialysis chain with facilities located nearby but not acquired. Multivariable Cox proportional hazards regression models and negative binomial models with predicted marginal effects were developed to examine health outcomes, controlling for patient, facility, and geographic characteristics. All facility ownership types were examined together and stratified analyses were conducted of facilities that were independently owned and chain owned prior to acquisitions. The study was conducted from January 2001 to September 2015; 174 905 patients starting in-center dialysis in the 3 years before and following dialysis facility acquisitions were included. Data were analyzed from March 2017 to December 2018.

EXPOSURES

Acquisition by a hemodialysis chain.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Twelve-month hazard of death and hospital days per patient-year were the primary outcomes.

RESULTS

Of the 174 905 patients included in the study, 79 705 were women (45.6%), 24 409 (14.0%) were of Hispanic ethnicity, 61 815 (35.3%) were black, 105 272 (60.2%) were white, and 1247 (0.7%) were Native American. Mean (SD) age was 65 (15) years. Before acquisitions, adjusted mortality and hospitalization rates were 10% (95% CI, -16% to -5%) and 2.9 days per patient-year (95% CI, -3.8 to -2.0) lower, respectively, at independently owned facilities that were acquired compared with those that were not acquired, while hospitalization rates were 0.7 days (95% CI, -1.2 to -2.0) lower at chain-owned facilities that were acquired compared with those that were not acquired. In stratified analyses of independently owned facilities, mortality decreases were smaller at acquired (-8.4%; 95% CI, -14% to -25%) vs nonacquired (-20.3%; 95% CI, -25.8% to -14.3%) facilities (DID P < .001). Similarly, hospitalization rates did not change at acquired facilities and decreased by 2.6 days per patient-year (95% CI, -3.6 to -1.7 days) at nonacquired facilities (DID P < .001). Acquisitions were not associated with changes in health outcomes at chain-owned facilities. Slower reductions in mortality and hospitalization rates at independently owned facilities contributed to significant differences in hospitalizations (-2.0 days; 95% CI, -2.5 to -1.6, at nonacquired vs 0.9 days; 95% CI, -1.3 to -0.5, at acquired facilities; DID, P < .001) across all ownership types but not mortality (DID, P = .28) with regard to acquisitions.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

Acquisition of independently owned dialysis facilities by larger dialysis organizations was associated with slower decreases in mortality and hospitalization rates, as nonacquired facilities appeared to experience more rapid improvements in outcomes over time.

Patient-Reported Experiences of Dialysis Care Within a National Pay-for-Performance System

IMPORTANCE

Medicare's End-Stage Renal Disease Quality Incentive Program incorporates measures of perceived value into reimbursement calculations. In 2016, patient experience became a clinical measure in the Quality Incentive Program scoring system. Dialysis facility performance in patient experience measures has not been studied at the national level to date.

OBJECTIVE

To examine associations among dialysis facility performance with patient experience measures and patient, facility, and geographic characteristics.

DESIGN

In this cross-sectional analysis, patients from a national end-stage renal disease registry receiving in-center hemodialysis in the United States on December 31, 2014, were linked with dialysis facility scores on the In-Center Hemodialysis Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (ICH-CAHPS) survey. Of 4977 US dialysis facilities, 2939 (59.1%) reported ICH-CAHPS scores from April 8, 2015, through January 11, 2016. Multivariable linear regression models with geographic random effects were used to examine associations of facility ICH-CAHPS scores with patient, dialysis facility, and geographic characteristics and to identify the amount of total between-facility variation in patient experience scores explained by these categories. Data were analyzed from September 15, 2017, through June 1, 2018.

EXPOSURES

Dialysis facility, geographic characteristic, and 10% change in patient characteristics.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Dialysis facility ICH-CAHPS scores and the total between-facility variation explained by different categories of characteristics.

RESULTS

Of the 2939 facilities included in the analysis, adjusted mean ICH-CAHPS scores were 2.6 percentage points (95% CI, 1.5-3.7) lower in for-profit facilities, 1.6 percentage points (95% CI, 0.9-2.2) lower in facilities owned by large dialysis organizations, and 2.3 percentage points (95% CI, 0.5-4.2) lower in free-standing facilities compared with their counterparts. More nurses per patient was associated with 0.2 percentage points (95% CI, 0.03-0.3) higher scores; a privately insured patient population was associated with 1.2 percentage points (95% CI, 0.2-2.2) higher scores. Facilities with higher proportions of black patients had 0.95 percentage points (95% CI, 0.78-1.12) lower scores; more Native American patients, 1.00 percentage point (95% CI, 0.39-1.60) lower facility scores. Geographic location and dialysis facility characteristics explained larger proportions of the overall between-facility variation in ICH-CAHPS scores than did patient characteristics.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

This study suggests that for-profit operation, free-standing status, and large dialysis organization designation were associated with less favorable patient-reported experiences of care. Patient experience scores varied geographically, and black and Native American populations reported less favorable experiences. The study findings suggest that perceived quality of care delivered in these settings are of concern, and that there may be opportunities for improved implementation of patient experience surveys as is highlighted.

The Role of Big Data in the Development and Evaluation of US Dialysis Care

Rapid growth in electronic communications and digitalization, combined with advances in data management, analysis, and storage, have led to an era of "Big Data." The Social Security Amendments of 1972 turned end-stage renal disease (ESRD) care into a single-payer system for most patients requiring dialysis in the United States. As a result, there are few areas of medicine that have been as influenced by Big Data as dialysis care, for which Medicare's large administrative data sets have had a central role in the evaluation and development of public policy for several decades. In the 1970/1980s, Medicare data helped identify concerning trends in costs, access to dialysis care, and quality of care delivered. As the research community and policymakers made Medicare's administrative data increasingly accessible for investigation, analyses of Medicare claims have had a large role in facilitating policy synthesis and refinement. Efforts to address the skyrocketing cost of injectable drugs in the 1990s and 2000s exemplify this expanded role of Big Data. Although there are opportunities for large government and nongovernmental administrative data sets to continue serving a critical role in the evaluation and development of ESRD policies, it is important to understand challenges and limitations associated with their use.

Crisis in U.S. Health Care: Corporate Power Still Blocks Reform

The corporate, largely privatized market-based U.S. health care system is deteriorating in terms of increasing costs, decreasing access, unacceptable quality of care, inequities, and disparities. Reform efforts to establish universal insurance coverage have failed on six occasions over the last century, largely through opposition of corporate stakeholders in the medical-industrial complex. This article provides historical perspective to previous reform attempts, updates the current battle between Republicans and Democrats over repeal of the 2010 Affordable Care Act (ACA), and compares three financing alternatives-continuation of the ACA; its replacement by a Republican plan (the House's American Health Care Act or its Senate counterpart, the Better Care Reconciliation Act); and single-payer national health insurance (NHI or Medicare for All). Markers are described that reveal the extent of the current crisis in U.S. health care. Evidence is presented that the private insurance industry, increasingly dependent on bailout by the government, is in a "death spiral." NHI is gaining increasing public support as the only financing alternative to provide universal coverage. Nine lessons that are still unlearned in the United States concerning health care are discussed, together with future prospects to establish universal coverage in this embattled and changing political environment.

Long-term clinical outcome for patients poisoned by the fungal nephrotoxin orellanine

Background

Accidental intake of mushrooms of the Cortinarius species (deadly webcap) may cause irreversible renal damage and the need for dialysis or transplantation. The species is found in forests of Northern Europe, Scandinavia and North America and may be mistaken for other edible mushrooms. The highly selective nephrotoxic compound of the mushroom is called orellanine. Very little is known about the long-term effects of the nephrotoxin.

Methods

We identified patients who ingested deadly webcap in the period of 1979 to 2012. Informed consent and medical records were obtained for 28 of the 39 cases that occurred during the 34-year period. A case control group was also studied based on sex, age and initiation of dialysis or transplantation.

Results

The average age at time of the accidental intake was 40 ± 3 (n = 28) years. 64% of patients were male, and 22 of 28 patients developed acute kidney injury requiring dialysis. Serum creatinine peaked at 1 329 ± 133 μmol/l, and serum urea was 31 ± 3.5 mmol/l. No signs of acute damage were present in any other organ. The average time of follow-up was 16.9 ± 2.1 years (1.24–34.3 years, n = 28). 15 patients were transplanted and 3 also had a second graft. At follow-up, 23 patients were alive, and five had died at ages of 67 ± 5 (range 54–84). The outcome was similar in the case control group with 6 deaths in 20 patients.

Conclusion

We conclude that the long-term prognosis for patients poisoned by deadly webcap who lost their renal function is not different compared to other patients in active uremic care.

For-profit status and industry evolution in health care markets: evidence from the dialysis industry

This paper examines why for-profit dialysis providers have displaced non-profit providers over the last 25 years. Using detailed data on individual markets' evolutions, I find that for-profit facilities were quicker to enter growing markets and slower to exit declining ones than non-profit facilities. Moreover, for-profit providers' presence in a market had a larger impact on the exit and entry behavior of competitors. These results suggest that for-profit dialysis providers have an advantage in static competition relative to non-profit providers, and that this-rather than lower entry costs-explains their increasing prominence. Additional empirical analyses indicate that for-profits' advantage cannot solely be attributed to efficiencies related to membership in a large, multi-facility chain. This further suggests that managerial incentives have had an economically significant impact on long-run market structure in this industry.

Morbidity, mortality and quality of life in the ageing haemodialysis population: results from the ELDERLY study

Background

The physical–functional and social–emotional health as well as survival of the elderly (≥75 years of age) haemodialysis patient is commonly thought to be poor. In a prospective, multicentre, non-interventional, observational study, the morbidity, mortality and quality of life (QoL) in this patient group were examined and compared with a younger cohort.

Methods

In 92 German dialysis centres, 2507 prevalent patients 19–98 years of age on haemodialysis for a median of 19.2 months were included in a drug monitoring study of darbepoetin alfa. To examine outcome and QoL parameters, 24 months of follow-up data in the age cohorts <75 and ≥75 years were analysed. Treatment parameters, adverse and intercurrent events, hospitalizations, morbidity and mortality were assessed. QoL was evaluated by means of the 47-item Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy–Anaemia score (FACT-An, version 4).

Results

The 2-year mortality rate was 34.7% for the older cohort and 15.8% for the younger cohort. The mortality rate for the haemodialysed elderly patients was 6.2% higher in absolute value compared with the age-matched background population. A powerful predictor of survival was the baseline FACT-An score and a close correlation with the 20-item anaemia subscale (AnS) was demonstrated. While the social QoL in the elderly patients was more stable than in the younger cohort (leading to equivalent values at the end of the study period), a pronounced deterioration of physical and functional status was observed. The median number of all-cause hospital days per patient-year was 12.3 for the elderly cohort and 8.9 for the younger patient population. The overall 24-month hospitalization rate was only marginally higher in the elderly cohort (34.0 versus 33.3%).

Conclusions

In this observational study, the mortality rate of elderly haemodialysis patients was not exceedingly high compared with the age-matched background population. Furthermore, the hospitalization rate was only slightly higher compared with the younger age group and the median yearly hospitalization time trended lower compared with registry data. The social well-being of elderly haemodialysis patients showed a less pronounced decline over time and was equal to the score of the younger cohort at the end of the study period. The physical and functional status in the elderly patients was lower and showed a sharper decline over time. The baseline FACT-An score correlated closely with the 24-month survival probability.

Hemodialysis system privatization and patient survival: a report from a large registry Eastern Europe cohort

BACKGROUND

There has been a rapid increase in incident and prevalent rates of hemodialysis (HD) patients in Romania following the 2004 system privatization, but little is known about the impact of privatization on patient outcomes.

METHODS

We retrospectively examined the outcome during 1 year of 8161 prevalent HD patients registered in the Romanian Renal Registry at 31 December 2011. Standardized mortality ratio (SMR) was calculated for each for-profit (FP) and non-profit (NP) HD provider.

RESULTS

The 12-month SMR across all HD chain providers was 1.27. FP Chain 1 and the "other" group had SMR similar to the reference level. The mortality rate was two times higher in public NP dialysis centers than the national reference. A stepwise Cox regression analysis identified older age, male gender, DN as primary renal disease and the HD chain provider to be independently associated with a higher mortality. Excepting patients treated by FP Chain 4, patients treated by all the other dialysis providers had a better outcome than those treated in NP facilities.

CONCLUSION

In conclusion, the increase in number of patients treated was not doubled by an increase in their survival. In the context of an expanding dialysis marketplace that tends to consolidate around large for-profit (FP) providers, further exploration of indicators associated with mortality may guide future healthcare policy to improve patient outcomes.

Geographic variation and neighborhood factors are associated with low rates of pre-end-stage renal disease nephrology care

Geographic variation of pre-end-stage renal disease (pre-ESRD) nephrology care has not been studied across the United States. Here we sought to identify geographic differences in pre-ESRD care, assess for county-level geographic and sociodemographic risk factors, and correlate with patient outcomes using facility-level mortality. Patients from 5387 dialysis facilities across the United States from 2007 to 2010 were included from the Dialysis Facility Report. Marginal generalized estimating equations were used for modeling with geographic cluster analysis to detect clusters of facilities with low rates of pre-ESRD care. On average, 67% of patients received pre-ESRD care in the United States but with significant variability across regions ranging from 3 to 99%. Five geographic clusters of facilities with low rates of pre-ESRD care were the metropolitan areas of San Francisco, Los Angeles, Chicago, Miami, and Baltimore, along with Southern states along the Mississippi River. Dialysis facilities with the lowest rates of pre-ESRD care were more likely to be located in urban counties with high African-American populations and low educational attainment. A 10% higher proportion of patients receiving pre-ESRD care was associated with 1.3% lower patient mortality as reflected by facility-level mortality. Thus, geographic and sociodemographic factors can be used to design quality improvement initiatives to increase access to nephrology care nationwide and improve patient outcomes.

The influence of socioeconomic status on patient survival on chronic dialysis

Socioeconomic status (SES) has been linked to worse end-stage kidney disease survival. The effect of SES on survival on chronic dialysis, including the impact of transplantation, was examined. A retrospective, observational study investigated the association of SES with dialysis patient survival, with censoring at time of transplantation. Adult patients commencing dialysis from 1990 to 2009 in an Irish tertiary center received a spatial SES score using the 2011 Pobal Haase-Pratschke Deprivation Index and were compared by quartile. Cox proportional hazard models and Kaplan-Meier survival analysis examined any association of SES with survival. The 1794 patients included had a median follow-up of 3.8 years. Patients in the lowest SES area quartile were significantly younger than the highest, mean age 56.7 vs. 59 years, P = 0.006, respectively. There was no association between SES area score and survival in an unadjusted model (hazard ratio [HR] 1.00, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.99-1.01). Survival in the highest SES area quartile was superior to the lowest SES in a multivariable adjusted model including age, gender, and dialysis modality (HR 0.83, 95% CI 0.70-0.99, P = 0.04). These results were only mildly attenuated by censoring at time of transplantation (highest SES area quartile deprived vs. lowest SES area quartile, HR 0.85, 95% CI 0.70-1.03, P = 0.09). Superior patient survival was identified in the highest SES areas compared with the lowest following age-adjusted analyses, despite the older population in the most affluent areas. Further research should focus on identifying modifiable targets for intervention that account for this socioeconomic-related survival advantage.

Dialysis chains and placement on the waiting list for a cadaveric kidney transplant

BACKGROUND

The proliferation of multi-unit for-profit dialysis chains in the ESRD industry has raised concerns for patient quality of care including access to renal transplantation therapy (RTT). The effect of dialysis facility chain status on RTT is unknown.

METHODS

Data from the United States Renal Data System were used to identify 4,465 dialysis facilities and 56,714 dialysis patients who started hemodialysis in 2006. Patients were followed from initiation of hemodialysis in 2006 to placement on the renal transplant waiting list or to December 31, 2009. The role of dialysis facility chain status (affiliation, size, and ownership) on placement on the renal transplant waiting list was evaluated by multi-level mixed-effect regression models that account for clustering within facilities.

RESULTS

Patients from for-profit chain facilities, compared to nonprofit chain facilities, were 13% (95% CI 0.77-0.98) less likely to be waitlisted. In contrast, among nonchains, facility ownership did not influence likelihood of being waitlisted. There was also a marginally significant difference in waiting list placement by chain size: large chains compared with mid or small chains were 8% (95% CI 0.84-1.00) less likely to place patients on the waiting list. After adjustment for patient and facility characteristics, dialysis facility chain affiliation (chain-affiliated or not) was not found to be independently associated with the likelihood of placement on the transplant waitlist.

CONCLUSION

Dialysis chain affiliation expands previously observed ownership-related differences in placement on the waiting list. For-profit ownership of dialysis chain facilities appears to be a significant impediment to access to renal transplants.

Risk factors for hospitalization among older, incident haemodialysis patients

AIMS

The number of elderly persons with end-stage renal disease is increasing with many requiring hospitalizations. This study examines the causes and predictors of hospitalization in older haemodialysis patients.

METHODS

We reviewed hospitalizations of older (≥65 years) incident chronic haemodialysis patients initiating therapy between 1 January 2007 and 31 December 2009 under the care of a single Midwestern United States dialysis provider.

RESULTS

Of 125 patients, the mean age was 76 ± 7 years and 72% were male. At first dialysis, 68% used a central venous catheter (CVC) and 51% were in the hospital. Mean follow-up was 1.8 ± 1.0 years. At least one hospitalization occurred in 89 (71%) patients and half of all patients were hospitalized once within the first 223 days. Total hospital admission rate was 1.48 per patient year with hospital days totalling 8.54 days per patient year. The three most common reasons for first admission were cardiac (33%), infection (18%) and gastrointestinal (12%). Predictors of future hospitalization included the first dialysis occurring in hospital (hazard ratios (HR) 2.1, 95% CI 1.4-3.3, P = 0.0005) and the use of a CVC at first haemodialysis (HR 2.6, CI 1.6-4.4, P < 0.0001).

CONCLUSION

Hospitalizations are common in older incident haemodialysis patients. Access preparation and overall burden of illness leading to the initial hospitalization appear to play a role. Identification of additional factors associated with hospitalization will allow for focused interventions to reduce hospitalization rates and increase the value of care.

Confounders of mortality and hospitalization rate calculations for profit and nonprofit dialysis facilities: analytic augmentation

BACKGROUND

Patient outcomes have been compared on the basis of the profit status of the dialysis provider (for-profit [FP] and not-for-profit [NFP]). In its annual report, United States Renal Data System (USRDS) provides dialysis provider level death and hospitalization rates adjusted by age, race, sex, and dialysis vintage; however, recent analyses have suggested that other variables impact these outcomes. Our current analysis of hospitalization and mortality rates of hemodialysis patients included adjustments for those used by the USRDS plus other potential confounders: facility geography (end-stage renal disease network), length of facility ownership, vascular access at first dialysis session, and pre-dialysis nephrology care.

METHODS

We performed a provider level, retrospective analysis of 2010 hospitalization and mortality rates among US hemodialysis patients exclusively using USRDS sources. Crude and adjusted incidence rate ratios (IRRs) were calculated using the 4 standard USRDS patient factors plus the 4 potential confounders noted above.

RESULTS

The analysis included 366,011 and 34,029 patients treated at FP and NFP facilities, respectively. There were statistical differences between the cohorts in geography, facility length of ownership, vascular access, and pre-dialysis nephrology care (p < 0.001), as well as age (p < 0.01), race (p < 0.001), and vintage (p < 0.001), but not sex (p = 0.12). When using standard USRDS adjustments, hospitalization and mortality rates for FP and NFP facilities were most disparate, favoring the NFP facilities. Rates were most similar between providers when adjustments were made for each of the 8 factors. With the FP IRR as the referent (1.0), the hospitalization IRR for NFP facilities was 1.00 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.97-1.02; p = 0.69), while the NFP mortality IRR was 1.01 (95% CI 0.97-1.05; p = 0.64).

CONCLUSIONS

These data suggest there is no difference in mortality and hospitalization rates between FP and NFP dialysis clinics when appropriate statistical adjustments are made.

Comparison of hospitalization rates among for-profit and nonprofit dialysis facilities

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

The vast majority of US dialysis facilities are for-profit and profit status has been associated with processes of care and outcomes in patients on dialysis. This study examined whether dialysis facility profit status was associated with the rate of hospitalization in patients starting dialysis.

DESIGN, SETTING, PARTICIPANTS, & METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of Medicare beneficiaries starting dialysis between 2005 and 2008 using data from the US Renal Data System. All-cause hospitalization was examined and compared between for-profit and nonprofit dialysis facilities through 2009 using Poisson regression. Companion analyses of cause-specific hospitalization that are likely to be influenced by dialysis facility practices including hospitalizations for heart failure and volume overload, access complications, or hyperkalemia were conducted.

RESULTS

The cohort included 150,642 patients. Of these, 12,985 (9%) were receiving care in nonprofit dialysis facilities. In adjusted models, patients receiving hemodialysis in for-profit facilities had a 15% (95% confidence interval [95% CI], 13% to 18%) higher relative rate of hospitalization compared with those in nonprofit facilities. Among patients receiving peritoneal dialysis, the rate of hospitalization in for-profit versus nonprofit facilities was not significantly different (relative rate, 1.07; 95% CI, 0.97 to 1.17). Patients on hemodialysis receiving care in for-profit dialysis facilities had a 37% (95% CI, 31% to 44%) higher rate of hospitalization for heart failure or volume overload and a 15% (95% CI, 11% to 20%) higher rate of hospitalization for vascular access complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Hospitalization rates were significantly higher for patients receiving hemodialysis in for-profit compared with nonprofit dialysis facilities.

Facility size, race and ethnicity, and mortality for in-center hemodialysis

The association between dialysis facility size and mortality for patients undergoing hemodialysis remains largely unclear, and whether the relationship differs by race and ethnicity or among high-risk subgroups is not known. Using data from the USRDS, we analyzed mortality rates in 385,074 incident patients ages ≥ 18 years who received in-center hemodialysis at 4633 dialysis facilities between 2003 and 2009. Facilities were categorized by the number of hemodialysis stations (1-5, 6-10, 11-15, 16-20, 21-25, 26-30, 31-35, 36-45, 46-60, and ≥ 61 stations). We found significantly higher mortality associated with facilities comprising ≤ 15 stations, and within this group, mortality increased as the number of stations decreased. The association with increased mortality was weaker for facilities with 16-30 stations, but >30 stations offered no additional survival benefit. The association between increased mortality and facilities with ≤ 15 stations was stronger for racial minorities and patients with diabetes or cardiovascular diseases. After adjustments, blacks had a 78% greater 1-year mortality risk in facilities with one to five stations, whereas whites had only a 26% greater risk. Notably, other patient-related events remained comparable across the categories assessed. In summary, these data suggest that hemodialysis care at small facilities associates with a significant increase in mortality that is only partially explained by measured patient case mix, other well defined facility characteristics, and geographic region. Future studies should investigate differences in processes of care and practices among hemodialysis facilities of different sizes.

Influence of safety warnings on ESA prescribing among dialysis patients using an interrupted time series

Background

In March, 2007, a black box warning was issued by the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) to use the lowest possible erythropoiesis-stimulating agents (ESA) doses for treatment of anemia associated with renal disease. The goal is to determine if a change in ESA use was observed following the warning among US dialysis patients.

Methods

ESA therapy was examined from September 2004 through August 2009 (thirty months before and after the FDA black box warning) among adult Medicare hemodialysis patients. An interrupted time series model assessed the impact of the warnings.

Results

The FDA black box warning did not appear to influence ESA prescribing among the overall dialysis population. However, significant declines in ESA therapy after the FDA warnings were observed for selected populations. Patients with a hematocrit ≥36% had a declining month-to-month trend before (−164 units/week, p = <0.0001) and after the warnings (−80 units/week, p = .001), and a large drop in ESA level immediately after the black box (−4,744 units/week, p = <.0001). Not-for-profit facilities had a declining month-to-month trend before the warnings (−90 units/week, p = .009) and a large drop in ESA dose immediately afterwards (−2,487 units/week, p = 0.015). In contrast, for-profit facilities did not have a significant change in ESA prescribing.

Conclusions

ESA therapy had been both profitable for providers and controversial regarding benefits for nearly two decades. The extent to which a FDA black box warning highlighting important safety concerns influenced use of ESA therapy among nephrologists and dialysis providers was unknown. Our study found no evidence of changes in ESA prescribing for the overall dialysis population resulting from a FDA black box warning.

Patient care staffing levels and facility characteristics in U.S. hemodialysis facilities

BACKGROUND

Higher numbers of registered nurses (RNs) per patient have been associated with improved patient outcomes in acute-care facilities. Variation in and associations of patient care staffing levels and hemodialysis facility characteristics have not been examined previously.

STUDY DESIGN

Cross-sectional study using Poisson regression to examine associations between patient care staffing levels and hemodialysis facility characteristics.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

4,800 US hemodialysis facilities in the 2009 Centers for Medicare & Medicaid (CMS) End-Stage Renal Disease Annual Facility Survey (CMS-2744 form).

PREDICTORS

Facility characteristics, including profit status, freestanding status, chain affiliation, and geographic region, adjusted for facility size, capacity, functional type, and urbanicity.

OUTCOMES

Patient care staffing levels, including ratios of RNs, licensed practical nurses (LPNs), patient care technicians (PCTs), composite staff (RN + LPN + PCT), social workers, and dietitians to in-center hemodialysis patients.

RESULTS

After adjusting for background facility characteristics, ratios of RNs and LPNs to patients were 35% (P < 0.001) and 42% (P < 0.001) lower, respectively, but the PCT to patient ratio was 16% (P < 0.001) higher in for-profit than nonprofit facilities (rate ratios of 0.65 [95% CI, 0.63-0.68], 0.58 [95% CI, 0.51-0.65], and 1.16 [95% CI, 1.12-1.19], respectively). Regionally, compared to the Northeast, the adjusted RN to patient ratio was 14% (P < 0.001) lower in the Midwest, 25% (P < 0.001) lower in the South, and 18% (P < 0.001) lower in the West. Even after additional adjustments, the large for-profit chains had significantly lower RN and LPN to patient ratios than the largest nonprofit chain, but a significantly higher PCT to patient ratio. Overall composite staffing levels also were lower in for-profit and chain-affiliated facilities. The patterns hold when hospital-based units were excluded.

LIMITATIONS

Nursing hours were not available. Two part-time staff were counted as one full-time equivalent, which may not always be accurate.

CONCLUSIONS

The significant variation in patient care staffing levels and its associations with facility characteristics warrants inclusion in future large-scale hemodialysis outcomes studies. End-stage renal disease networks and hemodialysis facilities should attend to quality assurance and performance improvement initiatives that maximize licensed nurse staffing levels in hemodialysis facilities.

Variation in dialysis quality measures by facility, neighborhood, and region

BACKGROUND

We examined whether dialysis facility characteristics, neighborhood demographics, and region are associated with Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) dialysis facility quality measures in order to determine the most important targets for intervention.

METHODS

We linked US census data to the CMS Dialysis Compare File which contains information for facility outcomes for all CMS-certified dialysis facilities in 2007 (n=5616). We then used linear and logistic regression to characterize the association between dialysis facility quality--worse than expected patient survival, and the proportion of individuals in a facility achieving dialysis adequacy (urea reduction rate >65) or target hemoglobin (10<Hgb<12 g/dL)--and dialysis facility characteristics, neighborhood demographics, and region.

RESULTS

Only an increasing proportion of African Americans in the neighborhood is consistently associated with worse dialysis facility outcomes, even after controlling for neighborhood poverty. Facilities with the highest proportion of African Americans in the neighborhood had worse patient survival [odds ratio (OR) 4.6; 95% confidence interval (CI), 2.8-7.6], were less likely to have adequate dialysis (β -1.4; 95% CI, -2.3 to -0.6), and achieve targeted hemoglobin (β -3.1; 95% CI, -4.7 to -1.6) compared to those with the lowest proportion. No other predictor-facility, neighborhood, or region--was consistently associated with dialysis facility quality.

CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of African Americans in the dialysis facility neighborhood is strongly and consistently associated with lower facility quality. Quality improvement efforts are particularly needed for dialysis facilities in minority communities.

Organizational status of dialysis facilities and patient outcome: does higher injectable medication use mediate increased mortality?

OBJECTIVE

Examine the mediating effect of injectable drugs in the relationship between dialysis facility organizational status and patient mortality.

STUDY SETTING

Medicare dialysis population.

STUDY DESIGN

Data from the U.S. Renal Data System (USRDS) were used to identify 3,884 freestanding dialysis facilities and 37,942 Medicare patients incident to end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in 2006. The role of injectable medications was evaluated during a 2-year follow-up period by mediational analyses using mixed-effect regression models.

DATA COLLECTION

USRDS data were matched with Dialysis Facility Report data from Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) and census data.

PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

There was a strong association found between organizational status and use of injectable drugs. Large for-profit chains used significantly higher injectable medications compared with nonprofit chains and independent facilities. However, the relationship between facility organizational status and patient mortality was not found to be mediated through the higher use of injectable drugs.

CONCLUSIONS

Large for-profit chain facilities administered higher IV epoetin, iron, and vitamin D dosages, but this did not result in improved survival. Given the associated costs and lack of a survival benefit, the overuse of injectable medications among the U.S. dialysis patients will likely end under the recent bundling of injectable medications without jeopardizing patient outcomes.

Experiences of care among Medicare beneficiaries with ESRD: Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey results

BACKGROUND

Patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD) have special health needs; little is known about their care experiences.

STUDY DESIGN

Secondary analysis of 2009-2010 Medicare Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) data, using representative random samples of Medicare beneficiaries. Description of Medicare beneficiaries with ESRD and investigation of differences in patient experiences by sociodemographic characteristics and coverage type.

SETTING & PARTICIPANTS

Data were collected from 823,564 Medicare beneficiaries (3,794 with ESRD) as part of the Medicare CAHPS survey, administered by mail with telephone follow-up of nonrespondents.

PREDICTOR

ESRD status, age, education, self-reported general and mental health status, race/ethnicity, sex, Medicare coverage type, state of residence, and other demographic measures.

OUTCOMES

6 composite measures of patient experience in 4 care domains (access to care, physician communication, customer service, and access to prescription drugs and drug information) and 4 ratings (overall care, personal physician, specialist physician, and prescription drug plan).

RESULTS

Patients with ESRD reported better care experiences than non-ESRD beneficiaries for 7 of 10 measures (P < 0.05) after adjustment for patient characteristics, geography, and coverage type, although to only a small extent (adjusted mean difference, <3 points [scale, 0-100]). Black patients with ESRD and less educated patients were more likely than other patients with ESRD to report poor experiences.

LIMITATIONS

Inability to distinguish patient experiences of care for different treatment modalities.

CONCLUSIONS

On average, beneficiaries with ESRD report patient experiences that are at least as positive as non-ESRD beneficiaries. However, black and less educated patients with ESRD reported worse experiences than other ESRD patients. Stratified reporting of patient experience by race/ethnicity or education in patients with ESRD can be used to monitor this disparity. Physician choice and confidence and trust in physicians may be particularly important for patients with ESRD.

International differences in hemodialysis delivery and their influence on outcomes

There are many variations in the delivery of hemodialysis. These variations include components of conventional dialysis, such as membrane type, dialysis dose, and session duration. In addition, alternative approaches to dialysis, such as hemodiafiltration, nocturnal hemodialysis, and short daily hemodialysis, also may be considered. For some of these practice variations, data exist to support one approach over another (eg, fistulas rather than grafts and catheters), but for many, no such data exist. Very few practice variations have been examined in randomized trials, and we are reliant predominantly on observational data. This review examines some practice variations in hemodialysis delivery, attempting to highlight which of these may be appropriate to consider when optimizing dialysis delivery in the clinic.