The Cost-Effectiveness of Palliative Care: Insights from the PAL-HF Trial

Heart failure and the cost of dying: must the ferryman always be paid?

BACKGROUND

Provision of palliative care in chronic heart failure (CHF) can support complex decision-making, significantly improve quality of life and may lower healthcare costs.

AIMS

To examine whether healthcare costs differed in terminal admissions according to the adoption of a palliative approach.

DESIGN

Retrospective review of medical records and costing data for all admissions resulting in death from CHF (July 2011 to December 2019), analysed as two groups (2011-2016 and 2016-2019) because of background changes in costings.

SETTING

Admissions with CHF resulting in death in an Australian tertiary referral centre.

RESULTS

The cohort (n = 439) were elderly (median age 83.7 years, interquartile range (IQR) = 77.6-88.7 years) and mostly men (54.9%). Half (230, 52.4%) were referred to a specialist palliative care team, whereas over a third (172, 39.2%) received a palliative approach. Receiving a palliative approach was associated with a nonstatistically significant lower admission cost (AU$12 710 vs AU$15 978; P = 0.19) between 2011 and 2016 (n = 101, 38.8%) and a significantly lower cost (AU$11 319 vs AU$15 978; P < 0.01) between 2016 and 2019 (n = 71, 39.7%). Intensive care admission resulted in the single greatest additional cost at AU$14 624 (IQR = AU$4130-AU$44 197) (n = 48, 2011-2016). Median terminal admission cost was lower for patients with comfort goals of care (P < 0.01), without life-sustaining interventions (P < 0.01) or who received a palliative approach (P < 0.01). Referral to inpatient specialist palliative care or receiving a palliative approach resulted in comparable admission costings (AU$11 621 [IQR = AU$4705-AU$32 457] and AU$11 466 [IQR = AU$4973-AU$25 614]).

CONCLUSION

A palliative approach in terminal CHF admission may improve quality at the end of life and decrease costs associated with care.

Providing clarity: communicating the benefits of palliative care beyond end-of-life support

Background

Palliative care affords numerous benefits, including improvements in symptom management, mental health, and quality of life, financial savings, and decreased mortality. Yet palliative care is poorly understood and often erroneously viewed as end-of-life care and hospice. Barriers for better education of the public about palliative care and its benefits include shortage of healthcare providers specializing in palliative care and generalist clinicians' lack of knowledge and confidence to discuss this topic and time constraints in busy clinical settings.

Objectives

Explore and compare the knowledge, values, and practices of community-dwelling adults 19 years and older from Nebraska about serious illness and end-of-life healthcare options.

Design

Secondary analysis of cross-sectional data collected in 2022 of 635 adults. We examined the fifth wave (2022) of a multiyear survey focusing on exploring Nebraskans' understanding of and preferences related to end-of-life care planning.

Methods

Descriptive statistics and chi-square tests to compare results between groups. Univariable and multivariable logistic regression analyses examine associations of variables as to knowledge of hospice and palliative care.

Results

While 50% of respondents had heard a little or a lot about palliative care, 64% either did not know or were not sure of the difference between palliative care and hospice. Those who reported being in poor health were not more likely to know the difference between palliative care and hospice compared to those reporting being in fair, good, or excellent health.

Conclusion

This study offers insight into the knowledge and attitudes about palliative care among community-dwelling adults, 19 years and older living in Nebraska. More effort is needed to communicate what palliative care is, who can receive help from it, and why it is not only for people at end of life. Advance care planning discussions can be useful in offering clarity.

Factors Associated With Mortality and Hospice Use Among Medicare Beneficiaries With Heart Failure Who Received Home Health Services

BACKGROUND

Although many Medicare beneficiaries with heart failure (HF) are discharged with home health services, little is known about mortality rates and hospice use in this group.

OBJECTIVES

To identify risk factors for 6-month mortality and hospice use among patients hospitalized due to HF who receive home health care, which could inform efforts to improve palliative and hospice use for these patients.

METHODS

A retrospective cohort analysis was conducted in a 100% national sample of Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries with HF who were discharged to home health care between 2017 and 2018. Multivariable Cox regression models examined factors associated with 6-month mortality, and multivariable logistic regression models examined factors associated with hospice use at the time of death.

RESULTS

A total of 285,359 Medicare beneficiaries were hospitalized with HF and discharged with home health care; 15.5% (44,174) died within 6 months. Variables most strongly associated with mortality included: age > 85 years (hazard ratio [HR] 1.66, 95% CI 1.61-1.71), urgent/emergency hospital admission (HR 1.68, 1.61-1.76), and "serious" condition compared to "stable" condition (HR 1.64, CI 1.52-1.78). Among 44,174 decedents, 48.2% (21,284) received hospice care at the time of death. Those with lower odds of hospice use at death included patients who were: < 65 years (odds ratio [OR] 0.65, CI 0.59-0.72); of Black (OR 0.64, CI 0.59-0.68) or Hispanic race/ethnicity (OR 0.79, CI 0.72-0.88); and Medicaid-eligible (OR 0.80, CI 0.76-0.85).

CONCLUSIONS

Although many patients hospitalized for HF are at risk of 6-month mortality and may benefit from palliative and/or hospice services, our findings indicate under-use of hospice care and important disparities in hospice use by race/ethnicity and socioeconomic status.

The complex intervention day hospice - a quality-assured study on the implementation, realization, and benefits with model character for Germany (IMPULS) using the example of "Day hospice Adiuvantes"

BACKGROUND

Currently, a conclusive experience on the uniform implementation and benefits of day hospice structures and interventions is lacking in Germany. The following questions should be clarified: (1) Which structural conditions and interventional measures should be established in day hospices from the point of view of patients, relatives, and specialist staff?; (2) Are the planned structures or interventions feasible and implementable under real conditions and accepted by patients, relatives, and staff?; (3) How can a final implementation and intervention catalog for day hospices be designed?; (4) Is this final catalog of services feasible, reasonable, economical, and effective under everyday conditions in day hospices?

METHODS

We planned to perform a multistage investigation, guided by the Medical Research Council Framework for the development and evaluation of complex interventions. In Stage 1, an initial theoretical construct on structures and interventions will be established through an extensive literature and guideline review on day hospices and through qualitative interviews. In a nominal group process, we will create a catalog of offers. In Stage 2, feasibility testing is conducted in a single-day hospice under real-life conditions using quantitative quality indicators and qualitative interviews. Structures and interventions can be adapted here if necessary. In a second nominal group process, a final structure and offer catalog is created, which is then implemented in Stage 3 in the day hospice under investigation and evaluated under real daily conditions through a process and effectiveness test. For this purpose, qualitative and quantitative quality indicators will be used and a comparative cohort of patients who are not cared for in the day hospice - but in the same network structure (oncology-palliative care network Lower Bavaria) - is examined.

DISCUSSION

Finally, the initial statements on the reasonable and realizable structures or interventions in day hospices and their benefits in daily real-life conditions as well as possible optimization processes shall be made.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was retrospectively registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS-ID DRKS00031613, registration date April 04, 2023) and the display portal of the Center for Clinical Trials of the University Hospital Regensburg (Z-2022-1734-6, registration date July 01, 2023).

The Role of Palliative Care in Cardiovascular Disease

The American Heart Association has recommended that palliative care be integrated into the care of all patients with advanced cardiac illnesses. Notwithstanding, the number of patients receiving specialist palliative intervention worldwide remains extremely small. This review examines the nature of palliative care and what is known about its delivery to patients with cardiac illness. Most of the published literature on the subject concern advanced heart failure; however, some data also exist regarding patients with heart transplantation, pulmonary hypertension, valvular disease, congenital heart disease, indwelling devices, mechanical circulatory support, and advanced coronary disease. In addition, outcome data, certification requirements, workforce challenges, barriers to implementation, and a potential caveat about palliative care will also be examined. Further work is required regarding appropriate means of implementation, quality control, and timing of intervention.

The Role of Palliative Care in Heart Failure, Part 3: Facilitators and Barriers to Cardiac Palliative Care Clinic Development

Background: Patients with heart failure frequently have significant disease burden and complex psychosocial needs. The integration of palliative care into the management of these patients can decrease symptom burden throughout their course of illness. Therefore, in 2009, we established a cardiac palliative care clinic colocated with heart failure providers in a large academic heart hospital. Objective: To better understand the facilitators and barriers to integrating palliative care into our heart failure management service. Design: Qualitative study using a semistructured interview guide. Setting, Subjects: Between October 2020 and January 2021, we invited all 25 primary cardiac providers at our academic medical center in the midwestern United States to participate in semistructured qualitative interviews to discuss their experiences with the cardiac palliative care clinic. Measurements: Interview transcripts were analyzed using a deductive-dominant thematic analysis approach to reveal emerging themes. Results: Providers noted that the integration of palliative care into the treatment of patients with heart failure was helped and hindered primarily by issues related to operations and communications. Operational themes about clinic proximity and the use of telehealth as well as communication themes around provider-provider communication and the understanding of palliative care were particularly salient. Conclusions: The facilitators and barriers identified have broad applicability that are independent of the etiological nature (e.g., cancer, pulmonary, neurological) of any specialty or palliative care clinic. Moreover, the strategies we used to implement improvements in our clinic may be of benefit to other practice models such as independent and embedded clinics.

Healthcare Costs at the End of Life for Patients with Non-cancer Diseases and Cancer in Denmark

OBJECTIVES

To examine costs of care from a healthcare sector perspective within 1 year before death in patients with non-cancer diseases and patients with cancer.

METHODS

This nationwide registry-based study identified all Danish citizens dying from major non-cancer diseases or cancer in 2010-2016. Applying the cost-of-illness method, we included costs of somatic hospitals, including hospital-based specialist palliative care, primary care, prescription medicine and hospice expressed in 2022 euros. Costs of patients with non-cancer diseases and cancer were compared using regression analyses adjusting for sex, age, comorbidity, residential region, marital/cohabitation status and income level.

RESULTS

Within 1 year before death, mean total healthcare costs were €27,185 [95% confidence interval (CI) €26,970-27,401] per patient with non-cancer disease (n = 109,723) and €51,348 (95% CI €51,098-51,597) per patient with cancer (n = 108,889). The adjusted relative total healthcare costs, i.e. the ratio of the mean costs, of patients with non-cancer diseases was 0.64 (95% CI 0.63-0.66) at 12 months before death and 0.91 (95% CI 0.90-0.92) within 30 days before death compared with patients with cancer. Mean costs of hospital-based specialist palliative care and hospice in the year leading up to death were €17 (95% CI €13-20) and €90 (95% CI €77-102) per patient with non-cancer disease but €1552 (95% CI €1506-1598) and €3411 (95% CI €3342-3480) per patient with cancer.

CONCLUSIONS

Within 1 year before death, total healthcare costs, mainly driven by hospital costs, were substantially lower for patients with non-cancer diseases compared with patients with cancer. Moreover, the costs of hospital-based specialist palliative care and hospice were minimal for patients with non-cancer diseases.

Effectiveness of Timely Implementation of Palliative Care on the Well-Being of Patients With Chronic Heart Failure: A Randomized Case-Control Study

Objectives: To date, there is a lack of consensus on the timely implementation of palliative care (PC) in patients with chronic heart failure (HF). We aimed to investigate the impact of primary PC intervention on chronic HF patients with different classes of cardiac function, and to determine a proper time point for the implementation of primary PC intervention. Methods: A consecutive series of 180 chronic HF patients with the New York Heart Association (NYHA) Cardiac function ranging from I to III were enrolled in this study. Patients with the same cardiac function class, they were randomized and equally assigned to the usual care (UC) group or to the PC intervention group. At the end of 24-week treatment, quality-of-life (QoL) measurements were evaluated. Left ventricular ejection fraction and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide were measured for each group at baseline and the final follow-up, respectively. Results: Through the 6-month follow-up, patients randomized to the PC intervention group presented significantly better QoL and cardiac function as compared with patients randomized to the UC group alone. Subgroup analysis showed that for patients with NYHA class II or III, significantly improved cardiac function and QoL were observed in the PC intervention group as compared with the control group. As for patients with class I, no significant difference was found between the 2 groups. Conclusions: Palliative program can effectively improve the QoL and cardiac function of patients with chronic HF. Moreover, we provided evidence on timely referral of patients to PC intervention, which could be beneficial for patients with NYHA class II.