Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Home
  • Content
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Podcasts
    • Subject Collections
    • Archives
    • ASN Meeting Abstracts
    • Saved Searches
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Resources
    • Reprint Information
  • Trainees
    • Peer Review Program
    • Prize Competition
  • About CJASN
    • About CJASN
    • Editorial Team
    • CJASN Impact
    • CJASN Recognitions
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Advertising
    • Reprint Information
    • Subscriptions
    • Feedback
  • ASN Kidney News
  • Other
    • JASN
    • Kidney360
    • Kidney News Online
    • American Society of Nephrology

User menu

  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart

Search

  • Advanced search
American Society of Nephrology
  • Other
    • JASN
    • Kidney360
    • Kidney News Online
    • American Society of Nephrology
  • Subscribe
  • My alerts
  • Log in
  • My Cart
Advertisement
American Society of Nephrology

Advanced Search

  • Home
  • Content
    • Published Ahead of Print
    • Current Issue
    • Podcasts
    • Subject Collections
    • Archives
    • ASN Meeting Abstracts
    • Saved Searches
  • Authors
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Author Resources
    • Reprint Information
  • Trainees
    • Peer Review Program
    • Prize Competition
  • About CJASN
    • About CJASN
    • Editorial Team
    • CJASN Impact
    • CJASN Recognitions
  • More
    • Alerts
    • Advertising
    • Reprint Information
    • Subscriptions
    • Feedback
  • ASN Kidney News
  • Visit ASN on Facebook
  • Follow CJASN on Twitter
  • CJASN RSS
  • Community Forum
Perspectives
Open Access

Telehealth and Home Dialysis

A New Option for Patients in the United States

Scott D. Bieber and Daniel E. Weiner
CJASN August 2018, 13 (8) 1288-1290; DOI: https://doi.org/10.2215/CJN.03010318
Scott D. Bieber
1Division of Nephrology, University of Washington Medicine, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington; and
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Daniel E. Weiner
2William B. Schwartz Division of Nephrology. Tufts Medical Center, Boston, Massachusetts
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data Supps
  • Info & Metrics
  • View PDF
Loading
  • dialysis
  • peritoneal dialysis
  • end-stage renal disease
  • Hemodialysis
  • Home
  • Telemedicine
  • end-stage kidney disease

Introduction

On February 9, 2018, after a brief government shutdown, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 was signed into law (1). This act contained key elements of the Creating High-Quality Results and Outcomes Necessary to Improve Chronic (CHRONIC) Care Act of 2017, including provisions expanding access to home dialysis (Table 1) (2). Language included in the Act modified provisions regarding access to home dialysis therapy for both traditional Medicare and Medicare Advantage plans to facilitate telehealth delivery. Previously, for a physician to use and bill for telehealth, the dialysis patient needed to be in an approved originating site during the telehealth encounter. These originating sites were limited to certain health care facilities, including hospitals, doctor’s offices, hospital-based dialysis centers, and skilled nursing facilities. The Act expanded originating sites to also include the home of a dialysis patient, defining this as an additional site of health care delivery for home dialysis patients.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
Table 1.

Key elements of the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 that may affect kidney care

The legislation explicitly states that individuals receiving home dialysis therapy “may choose to receive monthly end stage renal disease-related clinical assessments furnished on or after January 1, 2019 via telehealth.” Patients treated with dialysis must receive face-to-face assessments monthly for the first 3 months of home dialysis and at least once every 3 months thereafter. For physicians based in hospitals, where a facility or technical fee may be charged along with the professional fee, this hospital facility fee cannot be charged if the patient’s home is the site of the visit. This does not change the payment that the dialysis facility receives, which is determined by the ESRD prospective payment bundle.

The criteria for what constitutes a telehealth visit are set by the Secretary of Health and Human Services, and they likely will be revisited. Current requirements include interactive two-way communication using a real time audio and video connection by a health care provider who is not at the same location as the patient. Under the new law, existing geographic requirements limiting the originating site for telehealth to rural or underserved areas will not apply to patients treated with home dialysis. Therefore, patients from well served urban areas in close proximity to their providers could also use telehealth for the monthly visit. Under this law, payment for telehealth services to the physician who is located at a distant site would be the same as if the patient was seen without the use of telehealth services, and payment to the dialysis facility would remain the usual bundled rate.

Potential Advantages of Telehealth for Home Dialysis Encounters

Using telehealth for the provision of care to patients with kidney disease is not a new idea, with experiences treating hepatitis C in rural New Mexico extended to nephrology-focused telehealth systems within the Veterans Affairs health care system (3,4). In Australia, telehealth is used widely for patients receiving home dialysis (5,6). However, there remain little data available to compare the quality of care delivered by telehealth with that of traditional care for patients receiving home dialysis.

From the patient perspective, dialysis is a medical intervention with tremendous effect on day-to-day life. No other chronic health condition is as burdensome in terms of time required to receive therapy. Beyond physical and, potentially, cognitive effects, patients treated with dialysis lose independence, and, perhaps most significantly, suffer a loss of time. Decreasing the burden of time spent on visits to providers in clinics may benefit patients from a quality of life standpoint, aligning with patient goals (7,8). Although it is easy to appreciate benefits for patients in rural settings distant from dialysis providers, it is also conceivable that patients in suburban and urban areas will benefit by avoiding the need to brave traffic, public transportation, and/or parking to see their nephrologist. Telehealth can allow greater flexibility in scheduling from a patient standpoint, potentially allowing patients to miss less work time. Telehealth visits may also facilitate patient evaluation during times of limited access to transportation, such as can occur during periods of severe weather or natural disasters. Children and their families may also benefit given the potentially long travel times to see pediatric nephrologists in a dialysis center and limited daytime hours that may result in school and work absences. In summary, providing this additional option to patients can be seen as more patient-centered and equitable care, particularly for patients with limited resources.

For providers, encounters via telehealth may also be desirable, with more streamlined logistics that may allow greater efficiency or more timely patient evaluation during an acute medical event. Home dialysis specialists could share their expertise from a distance with a greater number of patients in regions where such expertise does not exist. Increased efficiency may also allow providers to spend more time with the patient during telehealth encounters. For nephrologists who have their monthly patient encounters in settings where a facility fee is charged, this will no longer be applicable, reducing costs for both the health care system and patients. Providers who previously did not do in-person home visits also may gain valuable insight into the home environment, and they may be better able to modify the dialysis prescription to best suit patients and their lifestyles.

Ultimately, patients still need to have monthly laboratory tests, and they will receive erythropoiesis stimulating agents, iron, and other medications and supplies from their dialysis facilities, making it likely but not essential that, for these logistic reasons, many patients will continue to be seen by nurses and other dialysis facility staff at least once a month. If this in-person visit occurs, it will not always need to be coordinated with the physician schedule, and, in months when this coordination is not feasible, a visit by the patient to a clinic specifically to see the nephrologist would be unnecessary. This flexibility is important, particularly when recognizing that many individuals who select home dialysis do so to increase their time to pursue other activities, including jobs, family responsibilities, and travel and other leisure activities (9).

Potential Disadvantages of Telehealth for Home Dialysis Encounters

Perhaps the most cited concern with telehealth encounters is the inability to fully examine patients, including physical evaluation of volume status and the dialysis access. It is conceivable that these assessments will be more limited during a telehealth encounter. Although some telehealth systems have developed remote capabilities for auscultation and close visual inspection, these systems may not be available for reliable or widespread use. There has yet to be a substitute for palpation, and three-dimensional observations are sometimes lost on a two-dimensional screen; the risk of missing opportunities for timely intervention on volume or access issues is greatest among patients who are not thriving with home dialysis or who have acute symptoms that are better evaluated in person.

Significant costs involved in establishing telehealth systems may be a disincentive for providers to offer this service, whereas differences in patient resources, including reliable internet access, may highlight existing disparities in care. Furthermore, lack of a facility fee may make it difficult for some health care systems to justify the cost of starting a telehealth program. Additionally, providers may find greater efficiency during in-person encounters in the clinic than with telehealth encounters.

As many providers have witnessed with the advent of electronic medical record systems, not all systems are created equally or with physicians' interests in mind. Poorly designed telehealth systems or systems with delays or dropped connections may ultimately frustrate patients and providers alike and lead to lower-quality encounters. A well designed and functioning telehealth system, however, could lead to better retention of patients on the telehealth platform (10).

A concern of utmost importance is protecting the patient’s choice of encounter. Some patients may feel isolated, abandoned, or anxious about being at home without regular in-person visits. Under the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, use of telehealth is the patient’s choice, not the provider’s choice. Despite the law clearly calling out patient choice in where patient visits occur, it is conceivable that providers may develop systems that do not offer that choice, citing unavailability of providers at times when patients are available and other logistic issues; accordingly, in the regulation to come, safeguards need to be in place to ensure that patients will not be limited to quarterly visits with their providers if that is not their desire. Similarly, many providers cherish in-person patient interactions, where the subtleties of communication and body language may contribute substantially to patient assessment and patient-physician relationships; accordingly, although a viable option, clinicians also should not be compelled to use telehealth by the dialysis provider. Critically, exposing providers to more screen time and fewer face-to-face patient-provider interactions could further provider burnout and dissatisfaction.

In conclusion, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, in addition to other major effects, allows the provision of telehealth encounters to patients on home dialysis. Although there are many potential advantages and disadvantages to the utilization of telehealth for management of home dialysis in end stage kidney failure and considerable details remain to be determined in regulations from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, this legislation has the potential to provide patients and providers greater freedom to choose where their care is delivered and for that reason, should be considered a positive change.

Disclosures

Both S.D.B. and D.E.W. are members of the American Society of Nephrology Quality Committee. S.D.B. is the medical director of a Northwest Kidney Center dialysis facility. D.E.W. is the medical director of a Dialysis Clinic, Inc. dialysis facility. Funding for DCI-related research activities is provided from DCI to D.E.W.’s institution.

Acknowledgments

The content of this article does not reflect the views or opinions of the American Society of Nephrology (ASN) or the Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology (CJASN). Responsibility for the information and views expressed therein lies entirely with the author(s).

Footnotes

  • Published online ahead of print. Publication date available at www.cjasn.org.

  • Copyright © 2018 by the American Society of Nephrology

References

  1. ↵
    H.R. 1892—Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018. Available at: https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/hr1892/BILLS-115hr1892enr.pdf. Accessed March 4, 2018
  2. ↵
    S.870—Creating High-Quality Results and Outcomes Necessary to Improve Chronic (CHRONIC) Care Act of 2017. Available at: https://www.congress.gov/bill/115th-congress/senate-bill/870. Accessed January 4, 2018
  3. ↵
    1. Arora S,
    2. Thornton K,
    3. Murata G,
    4. Deming P,
    5. Kalishman S,
    6. Dion D,
    7. Parish B,
    8. Burke T,
    9. Pak W,
    10. Dunkelberg J,
    11. Kistin M,
    12. Brown J,
    13. Jenkusky S,
    14. Komaromy M,
    15. Qualls C
    : Outcomes of treatment for hepatitis C virus infection by primary care providers. N Engl J Med 364: 2199–2207, 2011
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  4. ↵
    1. Crowley ST,
    2. Belcher J,
    3. Choudhury D,
    4. Griffin C,
    5. Pichler R,
    6. Robey B,
    7. Rohatgi R,
    8. Mielcarek B
    : Targeting access to kidney care via telehealth: The VA experience. Adv Chronic Kidney Dis 24: 22–30, 2017
    OpenUrlPubMed
  5. ↵
    1. Mitchell JG,
    2. Disney AP,
    3. Roberts M
    : Renal telemedicine to the home. J Telemed Telecare 6: 59–62, 2000
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  6. ↵
    1. Rohatgi R,
    2. Ross MJ,
    3. Majoni SW
    : Telenephrology: Current perspectives and future directions. Kidney Int 92: 1328–1333, 2017
    OpenUrlPubMed
  7. ↵
    1. Evangelidis N,
    2. Tong A,
    3. Manns B,
    4. Hemmelgarn B,
    5. Wheeler DC,
    6. Tugwell P,
    7. Crowe S,
    8. Harris T,
    9. Van Biesen W,
    10. Winkelmayer WC,
    11. Sautenet B,
    12. O'Donoghue D,
    13. Tam-Tham H,
    14. Youssouf S,
    15. Mandayam S,
    16. Ju A,
    17. Hawley C,
    18. Pollock C,
    19. Harris DC,
    20. Johnson DW,
    21. Rifkin DE,
    22. Tentori F,
    23. Agar J,
    24. Polkinghorne KR,
    25. Gallagher M,
    26. Kerr PG,
    27. McDonald SP,
    28. Howard K,
    29. Howell M,
    30. Craig JC
    ; Standardized Outcomes in Nephrology–Hemodialysis (SONG-HD) Initiative: Developing a set of core outcomes for trials in hemodialysis: An international delphi survey. Am J Kidney Dis 70: 464–475, 2017
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  8. ↵
    1. Urquhart-Secord R,
    2. Craig JC,
    3. Hemmelgarn B,
    4. Tam-Tham H,
    5. Manns B,
    6. Howell M,
    7. Polkinghorne KR,
    8. Kerr PG,
    9. Harris DC,
    10. Thompson S,
    11. Schick-Makaroff K,
    12. Wheeler DC,
    13. van Biesen W,
    14. Winkelmayer WC,
    15. Johnson DW,
    16. Howard K,
    17. Evangelidis N,
    18. Tong A
    : Patient and caregiver priorities for outcomes in hemodialysis: An international nominal group technique study. Am J Kidney Dis 68: 444–454, 2016
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  9. ↵
    1. Morton RL,
    2. Snelling P,
    3. Webster AC,
    4. Rose J,
    5. Masterson R,
    6. Johnson DW,
    7. Howard K
    : Dialysis modality preference of patients with CKD and family caregivers: A discrete-choice study. Am J Kidney Dis 60: 102–111, 2012
    OpenUrlCrossRefPubMed
  10. ↵
    1. Weinhandl ED,
    2. Collins AJ
    : Relative risk of home hemodialysis attrition in patients using a telehealth platform [published online ahead of print December 6, 2017]. Hemodial Int doi:10.1111/hdi.12621
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology: 13 (8)
Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology
Vol. 13, Issue 8
August 07, 2018
  • Table of Contents
  • Table of Contents (PDF)
  • About the Cover
  • Index by author
View Selected Citations (0)
Print
Download PDF
Sign up for Alerts
Email Article
Thank you for your help in sharing the high-quality science in CJASN.
Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Telehealth and Home Dialysis
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Society of Nephrology
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Society of Nephrology web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
Citation Tools
Telehealth and Home Dialysis
Scott D. Bieber, Daniel E. Weiner
CJASN Aug 2018, 13 (8) 1288-1290; DOI: 10.2215/CJN.03010318

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Request Permissions
Share
Telehealth and Home Dialysis
Scott D. Bieber, Daniel E. Weiner
CJASN Aug 2018, 13 (8) 1288-1290; DOI: 10.2215/CJN.03010318
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo CiteULike logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like

Jump to section

  • Article
    • Introduction
    • Potential Advantages of Telehealth for Home Dialysis Encounters
    • Potential Disadvantages of Telehealth for Home Dialysis Encounters
    • Disclosures
    • Acknowledgments
    • Footnotes
    • References
  • Figures & Data Supps
  • Info & Metrics
  • View PDF

More in this TOC Section

  • Reducing the Burden of CKD among Latinx
  • Social Determinants of Health in People with Kidney Disease
  • Personal Experiences of Patients in the Interaction of Culture and Kidney Disease
Show more Perspectives

Cited By...

  • No citing articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Similar Articles

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • PubMed
  • Google Scholar

Keywords

  • dialysis
  • peritoneal dialysis
  • end-stage renal disease
  • hemodialysis
  • Home
  • telemedicine
  • end-stage kidney disease

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Early Access
  • Subject Collections
  • Article Archive
  • ASN Meeting Abstracts

Information for Authors

  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Trainee of the Year
  • Author Resources
  • ASN Journal Policies
  • Reuse/Reprint Policy

About

  • CJASN
  • ASN
  • ASN Journals
  • ASN Kidney News

Journal Information

  • About CJASN
  • CJASN Email Alerts
  • CJASN Key Impact Information
  • CJASN Podcasts
  • CJASN RSS Feeds
  • Editorial Board

More Information

  • Advertise
  • ASN Podcasts
  • ASN Publications
  • Become an ASN Member
  • Feedback
  • Follow on Twitter
  • Password/Email Address Changes
  • Subscribe

© 2021 American Society of Nephrology

Print ISSN - 1555-9041 Online ISSN - 1555-905X

Powered by HighWire