Policies Regarding Treatment of End-Stage Renal Disease in the United States and United Kingdom

1986 ◽  
Vol 2 (2) ◽  
pp. 253-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Susan Klein Marine ◽  
Roberta G. Simmons

The treatment of End-Stage Renal Disease (ESRD) represents a victory for medical technology. Dialysis and kidney transplantation, developed in the early 1960s, offer alternative treatments to patients whose own kidneys no longer function; before, these patients faced a terminal diagnosis. Dialysis is a mechanical treatment in which the patient is connected to a machine that cleanses the blood of impurities and returns it to the body. Although recent innovations (e.g., continuous ambulatory peritoneal dialysis—CAPD) facilitate patient independence from a machine, replacement of the diseased kidneys is the most desirable and least expensive treatment for many patients (33;39). Kidney transplantation remains the most effective and common type of transplantation, and a new kidney (from a living-related or cadaver donor) often dramatically improves the recipient's health and general well-being (20;39). Now, in the mid-1980s, these technologies are no longer new and innovative. Further analysis of these established but costly technologies provides a perspective on the long-range implications of innovations in patient care: while some new issues have emerged, many problems originally associated with these treatments seem to have intensified. Access to treatment remains a central issue, closely linked to the dilemma of equity versus cost. The contrast in the access provided by the United States and Great Britain is dramatic (40); in 1982, the rate of ESRD treatment within the U.S. was twice that of the U.K. (353 versus 160 patients per million) (37). The U.S. policy is basically one of unlimited access, whereas the U.K. has restricted access.

2014 ◽  
Vol 39 (1) ◽  
pp. 50-58 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura C. Plantinga ◽  
Min Kim ◽  
Margarethe Goetz ◽  
David G. Kleinbaum ◽  
William McClellan ◽  
...  

Circulation ◽  
2018 ◽  
Vol 137 (suppl_1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Brittany Shelton ◽  
Deanna McWilliams ◽  
Rhiannon D Reed ◽  
Margaux Mustian ◽  
Paul MacLennan ◽  
...  

Background: Obesity has become a national epidemic, and is associated with increased risk for comorbid diseases including end-stage renal disease (ESRD). Among ESRD patients, obesity may improve dialysis-survival but decreases likelihood of transplantation, and as such, obesity prevalence may directly impact growth of the incident dialysis population. Methods: Incident adult ESRD patients with complete body mass index (BMI, kg/m 2 ) data were identified from the United States Renal Data System from 01/01/1995-12/31/2010 (n=1,822,598). Data from the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (n=4,303,471) represented the US population when weighted. Trends in BMI and obesity classes I (BMI of 30-34.9), II (BMI of 35-39.9), and III (BMI ≥40) were examined by year of dialysis initiation. Trends in median BMI slope were compared between the ESRD and US populations using linear regression. Results: Median BMI of ESRD patients in 1995 was 24.2 as compared to 28.0 in 2010, a 15.7% increase, while the US population’s median BMI increased from 24.2 in 1995 to 25.6 in 2010, a 5.8% increase. Comparable trends were noted with respect to prevalence of obesity classes I, II, and III (Table). BMI increase among the ESRD population was significantly more rapid than among the US population (β: 0.15, 95% CI: 0.14-0.17, p<0.001) (Figure). Conclusion: The median BMI of ESRD patients and prevalence of obesity among ESRD patients is increasing more rapidly than the US population. Given the increased dialysis-survival and decreased likelihood of transplantation associated with obesity, healthcare costs will likely increase, and thus, future research should be directed at examining medical expenditures.


2018 ◽  
Vol 102 ◽  
pp. S844
Author(s):  
Brittany Shelton ◽  
Deanna M McWilliams ◽  
Paul A MacLennan ◽  
Rhiannon D Reed ◽  
Margaux N Mustian ◽  
...  

2012 ◽  
Vol 3 (2) ◽  
pp. e67-e77
Author(s):  
Christopher S. Hollenbeak ◽  
Matthew Gitlin ◽  
Brian Custer ◽  
William M. McClellan ◽  
Axel Hofmann ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 174 (5) ◽  
pp. 699 ◽  
Author(s):  
Wolfgang C. Winkelmayer ◽  
Aya A. Mitani ◽  
Benjamin A. Goldstein ◽  
M. Alan Brookhart ◽  
Glenn M. Chertow

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document