Abstract
Hemobiologic reactions associated with the hemoincompatibility of extracorporeal circuit material are an undesirable and inevitable consequence of all blood-contacting medical devices, typically considered only from a clinical perspective. In hemodialysis (HD), the blood of patients undergoes repetitive (at least thrice weekly for 4 h and lifelong) exposure to different polymeric materials that activate plasmatic pathways and blood cells. There is a general agreement that hemoincompatibility reactions, although unavoidable during extracorporeal therapies, are unphysiological contributors to non-hemodynamic dialysis-induced systemic stress and need to be curtailed. Strategies to lessen the periodic and direct effects of blood interacting with artificial surfaces to stimulate numerous biological pathways have focused mainly on the development of ‘more passive’ materials to decrease intradialytic morbidity. The indirect implications of this phenomenon, such as its impact on the overall delivery of care, have not been considered in detail. In this article, we explore, for the first time, the potential clinical and economic consequences of hemoincompatibility from a value-based healthcare (VBHC) perspective. As the fundamental tenet of VBHC is achieving the best clinical outcomes at the lowest cost, we examine the equation from the individual perspectives of the three key stakeholders of the dialysis care delivery processes: the patient, the provider, and the payer. For the patient, sub-optimal therapy caused by hemoincompatibility results in poor quality of life and various dialysis-associated conditions involving cost-impacting adjustments to lifestyles. For the provider, the decrease in income is attributed to factors such as an increase in workload and use of resources, dissatisfaction of the patient from the services provided, loss of reimbursement and direct revenue, or an increase in doctor–nurse turnover due to the complexity of managing care (nephrology encounters a chronic workforce shortage). The payer and healthcare system incur additional costs, e.g., increased hospitalization rates, including intensive care unit admissions, and increased medications and diagnostics to counteract adverse events and complications. Thus, hemoincompatibility reactions may be relevant from a socioeconomic perspective and may need to be addressed beyond just its clinical relevance to streamline the delivery of HD in terms of payability, future sustainability, and societal repercussions. Strategies to mitigate the economic impact and address the cost-effectiveness of the hemoincompatibility of extracorporeal kidney replacement therapy are proposed to conclude this comprehensive approach.