Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30868410›Full record

ArticlePharmacoEconomics - open2019

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, Brian Godman

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PharmacoEconomics - open, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 20 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

20 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors.

Letlhogonolo MakheleDepartment of Public Health and Pharmacy Management, School of Pharmacy, Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University, Pretoria, South Africa.
Moliehi MatlalaDepartment of Public Health and Pharmacy Management, School of Pharmacy, Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University, Pretoria, South Africa.
Mncengeli SibandaDepartment of Public Health and Pharmacy Management, School of Pharmacy, Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University, Pretoria, South Africa.
Antony P MartinHealth Economics Centre, University of Liverpool Management School, Chatham Street, Liverpool, UK.
Brian GodmanDepartment of Public Health and Pharmacy Management, School of Pharmacy, Sefako Makgatho Health Sciences University, Pretoria, South Africa. Brian.Godman@strath.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-6539-6972

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundHaemodialysis (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.

objectiveThe aim of this study was to examine the direct costs of HD and PD in South Africa from a healthcare provider's perspective.

methodsA 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.

resultsThe 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).

conclusionHD 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.

Identifiers

PMID30868410
PMCPMC6861399

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.