Key result
Intensive blood pressure intervention in youth with CKD saves ~$9440 per patient by preventing KRT.
Why the study?
Intensive BP control slows CKD progression in youth, but whether implementing effective strategies is cost-saving despite requiring additional resources was unknown.
Does an intensive blood pressure intervention reduce costs and prevent kidney replacement therapy in youth with mild-to-moderate CKD compared to usual care?
Does an intensive blood pressure intervention reduce costs and prevent kidney replacement therapy in youth with mild-to-moderate CKD compared to usual care?
Implementing an intensive blood pressure control strategy in youth with CKD is projected to be cost-saving and reduce the need for kidney replacement therapy from a US payer perspective.
May support cost savings and fewer KRT events in youth CKD; leaves open confirmation before practice change.
BACKGROUND: Intensive blood pressure (BP) control in youth with chronic kidney disease (CKD) slows progression, delaying the need for kidney replacement therapy (KRT). Most youth with CKD have hypertension and BP control is difficult to achieve outside of controlled experimental settings. Implementing effective BP control strategies in this population may be cost-saving despite requiring additional resources. Our objective was to determine the economic and clinical impact of intensive versus usual care for BP management in youth with CKD in a microeconomic model. METHODS: We developed a decision tree from the US payer perspective to estimate the total costs and clinical effect of an intensified BP intervention over 5 years, modeled after the ESCAPE trial (Effect of Strict Blood Pressure Control and Angiotensin-Converting Enzyme [ACE] Inhibition on Progression of Chronic Renal Failure in Pediatric Patients) protocol. We compared this intervention to usual care in a hypothetical population of youth with mild-to-moderate CKD. Probabilities were informed by published literature; cost estimates were informed by publicly available data. Our outcomes were the net discounted cost of an intensive BP intervention, number needed to treat with the intervention to prevent 1 KRT episode, and incremental cost per KRT episode avoided. RESULTS: An intensive BP intervention, with a goal of an average 24-hour mean arterial pressure <50th percentile, improved outcomes with net cost savings of $9440 per participant over 5 years compared with usual care. To prevent 1 episode of KRT over 5 years, 13 participants need to receive intensive BP intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Routine use of the ESCAPE protocol for intensive BP control in youth with CKD could save overall costs for the payer and improve clinical outcomes.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Vincent et al. (2024) studied Mild-to-moderate chronic kidney disease. Intensive blood pressure intervention (ESCAPE protocol) vs. Usual care was evaluated on Net discounted cost, number needed to treat to prevent 1 kidney replacement therapy (KRT) episode, and incremental cost per KRT episode avoided. An intensive blood pressure intervention in youth with CKD resulted in net cost savings of $9440 per participant over 5 years, with a number needed to treat of 13 to prevent 1 KRT episode.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: