Key result
START intervention saves ~CAD 2.7 million over a decade by increasing peritoneal dialysis use.
Why the study?
Peritoneal dialysis is less resource-intensive than in-center hemodialysis, and the economic impact of the START quality improvement initiative to increase peritoneal dialysis use needed evaluation.
Does a quality improvement initiative to increase peritoneal dialysis use reduce healthcare costs in patients requiring dialysis?
Does a quality improvement initiative to increase peritoneal dialysis use reduce healthcare costs in patients requiring dialysis?
A quality improvement initiative to increase peritoneal dialysis utilization resulted in substantial modeled cost savings over time.
Modeled savings may inform PD access initiatives; leaves open prospective validation before practice change.
Home-based peritoneal dialysis (PD) is less resource-intensive than in-center hemodialysis. When provided with a choice, many patients prefer home-based therapies. The Starting Dialysis on Time, At Home on the Right Therapy (START) project was a quality improvement initiative aiming to increase PD use in Alberta, Canada. The START project provided site-specific audit and feedback reports on the processes of care for PD and increased the use of PD. In this current study, we conducted a retrospective cost analysis of the START project. We used the perspective of a publicly funded healthcare system to compare the costs before and after the START intervention. We used a decision analytic model stratifying the patient cohort by age (under and over 65 years) and estimated the impact of the START intervention on the overall cost of care at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years. Sensitivity analyses were performed. We found cost savings of $CAD 1.2 million, $CAD 1.9 million, $CAD 2.4 million, and $CAD 2.7 million for the START intervention at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years, respectively. Results were robust to a variety of sensitivity and scenario analyses. Even modest increases in PD utilization led to cost savings. We found that the implementation of a quality improvement initiative to increase PD resulted in substantial cost savings over time.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Armstrong et al. (2025) studied this question. The START intervention resulted in cost savings of CAD 1.2 million, CAD 1.9 million, CAD 2.4 million, and CAD 2.7 million at 1, 3, 5, and 10 years, respectively.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: