ArticleCost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E2026
Budget impact of expanded hemodialysis versus high-flux hemodialysis using real-world evidence in Colombia.
Article in Cost effectiveness and resource allocation : C/E, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundExpanded hemodialysis (HDx) using medium cut-off dialyzers has been associated with lower all-cause hospitalization rates compared to conventional high-flux hemodialysis. Reductions in hospitalization frequency represent a major driver of healthcare expenditures and may contribute to improved budget sustainability in resource-constrained healthcare systems. The objective of this study was to estimate the budget impact of adopting HDx from the perspective of the Colombian healthcare system, using real-world evidence.
methodsA budget impact analysis was developed according to the ISPOR guidelines using a tool built in Microsoft Excel. Clinical effectiveness inputs were derived from a multicenter cohort study (COREXH-E), including an extended dataset and a difference-in-differences analysis to estimate the effect of HDx on hospitalization rate while accounting for unobserved confounding. Cost inputs were obtained from national administrative databases, including hospitalization costs and bundled dialysis payments. The analysis adopted a one-year time horizon and a third-party payer perspective representing the Colombian healthcare system. Budget impact scenarios were evaluated, assuming HDx market uptake rates of 5%, 10%, 20%, and 50%. Deterministic and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed to assess parameter uncertainty.
resultsAdoption of HDx was associated with net cost savings for the Colombian healthcare system across all uptake scenarios. Under hospitalization rates observed in the real-world cohort, estimated annual savings ranged from USD 472,756 to USD 4,727,564 as HDx uptake increased from 5% to 50%. In scenarios reflecting higher hospitalization rates observed in the general Colombian hemodialysis population, annual savings ranged from USD 1,344,401 to USD 13,444,010. Cost savings were primarily driven by reductions in hospitalization frequency. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that HDx was cost-saving in 97.8% of simulations.
conclusionsThis study suggests that expanded hemodialysis could result in short-term cost savings for the Colombian healthcare system by reducing hospitalization-related costs without increasing dialysis expenses.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.