Publication: Cost-Utility Analysis of Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis and Automated Peritoneal Dialysis for Thai End-Stage Renal Disease Patients
Issued Date
2020-05-01
Resource Type
ISSN
22121102
22121099
22121099
Other identifier(s)
2-s2.0-85079029562
Rights
Mahidol University
Rights Holder(s)
SCOPUS
Bibliographic Citation
Value in Health Regional Issues. Vol.21, (2020), 181-187
Suggested Citation
Tanita Thaweethamcharoen, Suchai Sritippayawan, Prapaporn Noparatayaporn, Nipa Aiyasanon Cost-Utility Analysis of Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis and Automated Peritoneal Dialysis for Thai End-Stage Renal Disease Patients. Value in Health Regional Issues. Vol.21, (2020), 181-187. doi:10.1016/j.vhri.2019.10.004 Retrieved from: https://repository.li.mahidol.ac.th/handle/20.500.14594/53662
Research Projects
Organizational Units
Authors
Journal Issue
Thesis
Title
Cost-Utility Analysis of Continuous Ambulatory Peritoneal Dialysis and Automated Peritoneal Dialysis for Thai End-Stage Renal Disease Patients
Other Contributor(s)
Abstract
© 2019 ISPOR–The professional society for health economics and outcomes research Background: Continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD) is the first option for patients with end-stage renal disease under the benefit package of Thailand. Nevertheless, automated peritoneal dialysis (APD) may benefit these patients in terms of both medical and quality-of-life aspects, but it is more expensive. The economic evidence for the comparison between CAPD and APD is not inconclusive. Thus, this study aims to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CAPD compared with APD in PD patients. Objectives: To assess the health-related quality of life and costs between patients treated with CAPD and APD. Methods: A Markov model was developed to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of CAPD and APD from the societal perspective. Costs and outcomes were calculated over a lifetime horizon and discounted at an annual rate of 3%. The outcomes were presented as quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) of CAPD and APD. Utility scores were calculated from the utility values of the 5-level EuroQol questionnaire. A probabilistic sensitivity analysis using 5000 Monte Carlo simulations was performed to evaluate the stability of the results. Results: The costs of APD and CAPD were 12 868 080 and 11 144 786 Thai baht, respectively, whereas the QALYs were 24.28 and 24.72 QALYs, respectively. APD was more costly but less effective than CAPD. The most sensitive parameter was direct medical cost of outpatient visits. When the willingness-to-pay threshold was 160 000 Thai baht per QALY, the probability of APD providing a cost-effective alternative to CAPD was 19%. Conclusion: APD was not a cost-effective strategy as compared with CAPD at the current Thai threshold. These findings should encourage clinicians and policy makers to encompass the use of CAPD as a good value for money for PD treatment.