Treatment of acute renal failure in the intensive care unit: lower costs by intermittent dialysis than continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration

Farese, Stefan; Jakob, Stephan M; Kalicki, Robert; Frey, Felix J; Uehlinger, Dominik E (2009). Treatment of acute renal failure in the intensive care unit: lower costs by intermittent dialysis than continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration. Artificial organs, 33(8), pp. 634-40. Malden, Mass.: Wiley-Blackwell 10.1111/j.1525-1594.2009.00794.x

Full text not available from this repository.

Intermittent and continuous renal replacement therapies (RRTs) are available for the treatment of acute renal failure (ARF) in the intensive care unit (ICU). Although at present there are no adequately powered survival studies, available data suggest that both methods are equal with respect to patient outcome. Therefore, cost comparison between techniques is important for selecting the modality. Expenditures were prospectively assessed as a secondary end point during a controlled, randomized trial comparing intermittent hemodialysis (IHD) with continuous venovenous hemodiafiltration (CVVHDF). The outcome of the primary end points of this trial, that is, ICU and in-hospital mortality, has been previously published. One hundred twenty-five patients from a Swiss university hospital ICU were randomized either to CVVHDF or IHD. Out of these, 42 (CVVHDF) and 34 (IHD) were available for cost analysis. Patients' characteristics, delivered dialysis dose, duration of stay in the ICU or hospital, mortality rates, and recovery of renal function were not different between the two groups. Detailed 24-h time and material consumption protocols were available for 369 (CVVHDF) and 195 (IHD) treatment days. The mean daily duration of CVVHDF was 19.5 +/- 3.2 h/day, resulting in total expenditures of Euro 436 +/- 21 (21% for human resources and 79% for technical devices). For IHD (mean 3.0 +/- 0.4 h/treatment), the costs were lower (Euro 268 +/- 26), with a larger proportion for human resources (45%). Nursing time spent for CVVHDF was 113 +/- 50 min, and 198 +/- 63 min per IHD treatment. Total costs for RRT in ICU patients with ARF were lower when treated with IHD than with CVVHDF, and have to be taken into account for the selection of the method of RRT in ARF on the ICU.

Item Type:	Journal Article (Original Article)
Division/Institute:	04 Faculty of Medicine > Department of Dermatology, Urology, Rheumatology, Nephrology, Osteoporosis (DURN) > Clinic of Nephrology and Hypertension 04 Faculty of Medicine > Department of Intensive Care, Emergency Medicine and Anaesthesiology (DINA) > Clinic of Intensive Care
UniBE Contributor:	Farese, Stefan, Jakob, Stephan, Kalicki, Robert, Frey, Felix (B), Uehlinger, Dominik
Subjects:	600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health
ISSN:	0160-564X
Publisher:	Wiley-Blackwell
Submitter:	Factscience Import
Date Deposited:	04 Oct 2013 15:13
Last Modified:	29 Mar 2023 23:33
Publisher DOI:	10.1111/j.1525-1594.2009.00794.x
PubMed ID:	19624581
Web of Science ID:	000268455500010
URI:	https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/32231 (FactScience: 197241)