Fresenius Medical Care Of Batesburg Leesville is a medicare approved dialysis facility center in Leesville, South Carolina and it has 21 dialysis stations. It is located in Lexington county at 303 Village Square Drive, Leesville, SC, 29070.
You can reach out to the office of Fresenius Medical Care Of Batesburg Leesville at (803) 604-8002. This dialysis clinic is managed and/or owned by Fresenius Medical Care. Fresenius Medical Care Of Batesburg Leesville has the following ownership type - Profit. It was first certified by medicare in March, 2006. The medicare id for this facility is 422603 and it accepts patients under medicare ESRD program.
Dialysis Center Profile
| Name | Fresenius Medical Care Of Batesburg Leesville |
|---|
| Location | 303 Village Square Drive, Leesville, South Carolina |
|---|
| No. of Dialysis Stations | 21 |
|---|
| Medicare ID | 422603 |
|---|
| Managed By | Fresenius Medical Care |
|---|
| Ownership Type | Profit |
|---|
| Late Shifts | No |
|---|
NPI Associated with this Dialysis Facility:
Dialysis Facilities may have multiple NPI numbers. We have found possible NPI number/s associated with Fresenius Medical Care Of Batesburg Leesville
from NPPES records by matching pattern on the basis of name, address, phone number etc.
Please use this information accordingly.
| NPI Number | 1659319960 |
| Organization Name | Fresenius Medical Care Of Batesburg Leesville |
| Doing Business As | Bio-medical Applications Of South Carolina Inc |
| Address | 303 Village Square Batesburg-leesville, South Carolina, 29070 |
| Phone Number | (803) 604-8002 |
| NPI Number | 1639329972 |
| Organization Name | Fresenius Medical Care Batesburg-leesville |
| Doing Business As | Fresenius Medical Care Cna Kidney Centers, Llc |
| Address | 303 Village Square Dr Leesville, South Carolina, 29070 |
| Phone Number | (803) 604-8002 |
Survey of Patient's Experiences
Nephrologists Performance Ratings
| Experience Measure | Provider | National Avg. |
|---|
| Patients who reported that nephrologists always communicated and cared for them. | 74% | 67% |
| Patients who reported that nephrologists usually communicated and cared for them. | 11% | 15% |
| Patients who reported that nephrologists sometimes or never communicated and cared for them. | 15% | 18% |
| Patients who gave their nephrologists a rating of 9 or 10 on a scale of 0 (worst possible) to 10 (best possible). | 58% | 60% |
| Patients who gave their nephrologists a rating of 7 or 8 on a scale of 0 (worst possible) to 10 (best possible). | 28% | 26% |
| Patients who gave their nephrologists a rating of 6 or less than 6 on a scale of 0 (worst possible) to 10 (best possible). | 14% | 14% |
Dialysis Center Staff Performance Ratings
| Experience Measure | Provider | National Avg. |
|---|
| Patients who reported that dialysis center staff always communicated well, kept patients comfortable and pain-free as possible. | 60% | 62% |
| Patients who reported that dialysis center staff usually communicated, kept patients comfortable and pain-free as possible. | 20% | 20% |
| Patients who reported that dialysis center staff sometimes or never communicated, kept patients comfortable and pain-free. | 20% | 18% |
| Patients who gave their dialysis facility staff a rating of 9 or 10 on a scale of 0 (worst possible) to 10 (best possible). | 59% | 62% |
| Patients who gave their dialysis facility staff a rating of 7 or 8 on a scale of 0 (worst possible) to 10 (best possible). | 26% | 26% |
| Patients who gave their dialysis facility staff a rating of 6 or less than 6 on a scale of 0 (worst possible) to 10 (best possible). | 15% | 12% |
Overall Dialysis Center Performance Ratings
| Experience Measure | Provider | National Avg. |
|---|
| Patients who reported that 'YES', their nephrologists and dialysis center staff provided them the information they needed to take care of them. | 81% | 80% |
| Patients who reported that 'NO', their nephrologists and dialysis center staff does not provided them the information they needed to take care of them. | 19% | 20% |
| Patients who gave their dialysis center a rating of 9 or 10 on a scale of 0 (worst possible) to 10 (best possible). | 69% | 68% |
| Patients who gave their dialysis center a rating of 7 or 8 on a scale of 0 (worst possible) to 10 (best possible). | 18% | 20% |
| Patients who gave their dialysis center a rating of 6 or less than 6 on a scale of 0 (worst possible) to 10 (best possible). | 13% | 12% |
Patient Distribution
Anemia Management
| Dialysis patients with Hemoglobin data | 38 |
| Medicare patients who had average hemoglobin (hgb) less than 10 g/dL | 11 |
Dialysis Adequacy
Adult patinets who undergo hemodialysis, their Kt/V should be atleast 1.2 and for peritoneal dialysis the Kt/V should be atleast 1.7, that means they are receiving right amount of dialysis. Pediatric patients who undergo hemodialysis, their Kt/V should be atleast 1.2 and for peritoneal dialysis the Kt/V should be 1.8.
Higher percentages should be better.
- Hemodialysis
| Adult patients getting regular hemodialysis at the center | 75 |
| Adult patient months included in Kt/V greater than or equal to 1.2 | 654 |
| Percentage of adult patients getting regular hemodialysis at the center | 97 |
| Percentage of pediatric patients getting regular hemodialysis at the center | |
Mineral and Bone Disorder
An important goal of dialysis is to maintain normal levels of various minerals
in the body, such as calcium. This shows the percentage of patients
treated at Fresenius Medical Care Of Batesburg Leesville with elevated calcium levels.
| Patients with hypercalcemia | 75 |
| Hypercalcemia patient months | 654 |
| Patients with Serumphosphor | 74 |
| Patients with Serumphosphor less than 3.5 mg/dL | 10 |
| Patients with Serumphosphor from 3.5 to 4.5 mg/dL | 21 |
| Patients with Serumphosphor from 4.6 to 5.5 mg/dL | 27 |
| Patients with Serumphosphor from 5.6 to 7 mg/dL | 29 |
| Patients with Serumphosphor greater than 7 mg/dL | 14 |
Vascular Access
The arteriovenous (AV) fistulae is considered long term vascular access for hemodialysis because it
allows good blood flow, lasts a long time, and is less likely to get infected or cause blood clots than other types of access.
Patients who don't have time to get a permanent vascular access before they start hemodialysis treatments may need to use a venous catheter as a temporary access.
| Patients included in arterial venous fistula and catheter summaries | 64 |
| Patient months included in arterial venous fistula and catheter summaries | 530 |
| Percentage of patients getting regular hemodialysis at the center that used an arteriovenous (AV) fistulae for their treatment | 58 |
| Percentage of patients receiving treatment through Vascular Catheter for 90 days/longer | 9 |
Hospitalization Rate
The rate of hospitalization show you whether patients who were being treated regularly at a certain dialysis center were admitted to the
hospital more often (worse than expected), less often (better than expected), or about the same (as expected),
compared to similar patients treated at other centers.
| Standard Hospitalization Summary Ratio(SHR) Year | January, 2016 - December, 2016 |
| Patients in facility's Hospitalization Summary | 65 |
| Hospitalization Rate in facility | 240.1 (As Expected) |
| Hospitalization Rate: Upper Confidence Limit | 397.9 |
| Hospitalization Rate: Lower Confidence Limit | 148.9 |
Readmission Rate
The rate of readmission show you whether patients who were being treated regularly at Fresenius Medical Care Of Batesburg Leesville
were readmitted more often (worse than expected), less often (better than expected), or
about the same (as expected), compared to similar patients treated at other dialysis centers.
| Standard Readmission Summary Ratio(SRR) Year | January, 2016 - December, 2016 |
| Readmission Rate in facility | 24.9 (As Expected) |
| Readmission Rate: Upper Confidence Limit | 34.7 |
| Readmission Rate: Lower Confidence Limit | 16.7 |