Exploring kidney dialysis costs in the United States: a scoping review

AimsThe increasing prevalence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in the United States (US) represents a considerable economic burden due to the high cost of dialysis treatment. This review examines data from real-world studies to identify cost drivers and explore areas where dialysis costs could be reduced.MethodsWe identified and synthesized evidence published from 2016-2023 reporting direct dialysis costs in adult US patients from a comprehensive literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and grey literature sources (e.g. US Renal Data System reports).ResultsMost identified data related to Medicare expenditures. Overall Medicare spending in 2020 was $29B for hemodialysis and $2.8B for peritoneal dialysis (PD). Dialysis costs accounted for almost 80% of total Medicare expenditures on ESRD beneficiaries. Private insurance payers consistently pay more for dialysis; for example, per person per month spending by private insurers on outpatient dialysis was estimated at $10,149 compared with Medicare spending of $3,364. Dialysis costs were higher in specific high-risk patient groups (e.g. type 2 diabetes, hepatitis C). Spending on hemodialysis was higher than on PD, but the gap in spending between PD and hemodialysis is closing. Vascular access costs accounted for a substantial proportion of dialysis costs.LimitationsInsufficient detail in the identified studies, especially related to outpatient costs, limits opportunities to identify key drivers. Differences between the studies in methods of measuring dialysis costs make generalization of these results difficult.ConclusionsThese findings indicate that prevention of or delay in progression to ESRD could have considerable cost savings for Medicare and private payers, particularly in patients with high-risk conditions such as type 2 diabetes. More efficient use of resources is needed, including low-cost medication, to improve clinical outcomes and lower overall costs, especially in high-risk groups. Widening access to PD where it is safe and appropriate may help to reduce dialysis costs. Previous papers have studied the cost of treating patients who need dialysis for kidney failure. We reviewed these costs and looked for patterns. Dialysis was the most expensive part of treatment for people with kidney disease who have Medicare. Dialysis with private insurance was much more expensive than with Medicare. People with diabetes experienced higher costs of dialysis than those without diabetes. Dialysis in a hospital costs more than dialysis at home. There are opportunities to reduce the cost of dialysis that should be explored further, such as more use of low-cost medication that can prevent the worsening of kidney disease and reduce the need for dialysis.