Hemodialysis vs. Peritoneal Dialysis: A Cost-Effectiveness Analysis

Abstract

Background: Healthcare systems face a large financial and clinical problem as a result of end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The decision between the two main renal replacement techniques, hemodialysis and peritoneal dialysis, is crucial. The cost-effectiveness of these medicines in the management of ESRD is evaluated in this study.

Methods: Data on adult ESRD patients who underwent hemodialysis or peritoneal dialysis from 2020-2022 were used in a retrospective analysis. The cost per quality-adjusted life year (QALY) gained, direct medical costs, and quality of life (as measured by the EQ-5D) were all examined in the study. To evaluate the reliability of the results, sensitivity tests and subgroup analyses were used.

Results: In this study, Hemodialysis emerged as more cost-effective than Peritoneal Dialysis for managing End-Stage Renal Disease. Hemodialysis incurred higher direct medical costs, with annual costs of ₹27,50,000, while Peritoneal Dialysis cost ₹22,60,000 per patient. Patients on Hemodialysis reported higher quality of life across various domains, as evidenced by EQ-5D scores. These findings guide informed decision-making in ESRD management.

Conclusion: Despite greater direct medical expenditures, hemodialysis has proven to be a cost-effective ESRD management strategy. These conclusions were strengthened by sensitivity analysis and quality of life outcomes. Individual preferences must be taken into account in patient-centered treatment. These conclusions help healthcare practitioners, policymakers, and payers make well-informed decisions that improve patient outcomes while effectively allocating healthcare resources.