Which Cost Components Influence the Cost of Palliative Care in the Last Hospitalization? A Retrospective Analysis of Palliative Care Versus Usual Care at a Swiss University Hospital

An economic evaluation of an early palliative care intervention among patients with advanced cancer

BACKGROUND

Early integration of palliative care into oncology care has shown positive effects on patient symptoms and quality of life. It may also reduce health care costs. However given the heterogeneity of settings and interventions and the lack of information on the minimally effective dose for influencing care utilisation and costs, it remains uncertain whether early palliative care reduces costs.

OBJECTIVES

We sought to determine whether an early palliative care intervention integrated in usual oncology care in a Swiss hospital setting reduced utilisation and costs of health care in the last month of life when compared with usual oncology care alone.

METHODS

We performed a cost-consequences analysis alongside a multicentre trial. We extracted costs from administrative health insurance data and health care utilisation from family caregiver surveys to compare two study arms: usual oncology care and usual oncology care plus the palliative care intervention. The intervention consisted of a single-structured, multiprofessional conversation with the patient about symptoms, end-of-life decisions, network building and support for carers (SENS). The early palliative care intervention was performed within 16 weeks of the diagnosis of a tumour stage not amenable or responsive to curative treatment.

RESULTS

We included 58 participants with advanced cancer in our economic evaluation study. Median overall health care costs in the last month of life were 7892 Swiss Francs (CHF) (interquartile range: CHF 5637-13,489) in the intervention arm and CHF 8492 [CHF 5411-12,012] in the control arm. The average total intervention treatment cost CHF 380 per patient. Integrating an early palliative care intervention into usual oncology care showed no significant difference in health care utilisation or overall health care costs between intervention and control arms (p = 0.98).

CONCLUSION

Although early palliative care is often presented as a cost-reducing care service, we could not show a significant effect of the SENS intervention on health care utilisation and costs in the last month of life. However, it may be that the intervention was not intensive enough, the timeframe too short or the study population too small for measurable effects. Patients appreciated the intervention. Single-structured early palliative care interventions are easy to implement in clinical practice and present low treatment costs. Further research about the economic impact of early palliative care should focus on extracting large, detailed cost databases showing potential shifts in cost and cost-effectiveness.

CLINICAL TRIALS

gov Identifier: NCT01983956.

[Palliative Care Needs in Primary Health Care: Characteristics of Patients with Advanced Cancer and Dementia]

INTRODUCTION

The increase in life expectancy brought a higher prevalence of chronic diseases, with an emphasis on those who reached advanced stages and required palliative care. We aimed to characterize patients diagnosed with advanced neoplasms and/or dementia accompanied in primary health care and to test the sensitivity of two tools for identifying patients with palliative needs.

METHODS

We recruited three voluntary family physicians who provided data relative to 623 patients with active codification for neoplasm and/or dementia on the MIM@UF platform. We defined 'patient with palliative needs' as any patient with this codification in advanced stadium and made their clinical and sociodemographic characterization. Assuming the existence of advanced-stage disease as the gold standard, we calculated and compared the sensitivities of each of the tools under study: the surprise question, the question 'do you think this patient has palliative needs?' and an instrument that corresponded to identification by at least one of the questions.

RESULTS

Among the analyzed data, there were 559 (89.7%) active codifications of neoplasm and 64 (10.3%) of dementia; the prevalence of advanced neoplasm and dementia was 1.0% in the studied sample. The subgroup of patients with advanced dementia showed female sex predominance, an older age, and less access to health care. In both subgroups there was a scarcity of data related to education and income, and we observed polypharmacotherapy and multimorbidity. The sensitivity of the surprise question was 33.3% for neoplasia and 69.3% for dementia; of the new tool 50.0% for neoplasia and 92.3% for dementia; and, when used together, 55.6% for neoplasia and 92.3% for dementia.

CONCLUSION

Our results help characterize two subpopulations of patients in need of palliative care and advance with a possible tool for their identification, to be confirmed in a representative sample.

Health economic evaluation of a nurse-led care model from the nursing home perspective focusing on residents' hospitalisations

BACKGROUND

Health economic evaluations of the implementation of evidence-based interventions (EBIs) into practice provide vital information but are rarely conducted. We evaluated the health economic impact associated with implementation and intervention of the INTERCARE model-an EBI to reduce hospitalisations of nursing home (NH) residents-compared to usual NH care.

METHODS

The INTERCARE model was conducted in 11 NHs in Switzerland. It was implemented as a hybrid type 2 effectiveness-implementation study with a multi-centre non-randomised stepped-wedge design. To isolate the implementation strategies' costs, time and other resources from the NHs' perspective, we applied time-driven activity-based costing. To define its intervention costs, time and other resources, we considered intervention-relevant expenditures, particularly the work of the INTERCARE nurse-a core INTERCARE element. Further, the costs and revenues from the hotel and nursing services were analysed to calculate the NHs' losses and savings per resident hospitalisation. Finally, alongside our cost-effectiveness analysis (CEA), a sensitivity analysis focused on the intervention's effectiveness-i.e., regarding reduction of the hospitalisation rate-relative to the INTERCARE costs. All economic variables and CEA were assessed from the NHs' perspective.

RESULTS

Implementation strategy costs and time consumption per bed averaged 685CHF and 9.35 h respectively, with possibilities to adjust material and human resources to each NH's needs. Average yearly intervention costs for the INTERCARE nurse salary per bed were 939CHF with an average of 1.4 INTERCARE nurses per 100 beds and an average employment rate of 76% of full-time equivalent per nurse. Resident hospitalisation represented a total average loss of 52% of NH revenues, but negligible cost savings. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of the INTERCARE model compared to usual care was 22'595CHF per avoided hospitalisation. As expected, the most influential sensitivity analysis variable regarding the CEA was the pre- to post-INTERCARE change in hospitalisation rate.

CONCLUSIONS

As initial health-economic evidence, these results indicate that the INTERCARE model was more costly but also more effective compared to usual care in participating Swiss German NHs. Further implementation and evaluation of this model in randomised controlled studies are planned to build stronger evidential support for its clinical and economic effectiveness.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov ( NCT03590470 ).

Does a Hospital Palliative Care Team Have the Potential to Reduce the Cost of a Terminal Hospitalization? A Retrospective Case-Control Study in a Czech Tertiary University Hospital

Background:

More than 50% of patients worldwide die in hospitals and end-of-life care is costly. We aimed to explore whether support from the palliative team can influence end-of-life costs.

Methods:

This was a descriptive retrospective case–control study conducted at a Czech tertiary hospital. We explored the difference in daily hospital costs between patients who died with and without the support of the hospital palliative care team from January 2019 to April 2020. Big data from registries of routine visits were used for case–control matching. As secondary outcomes, we compared the groups over the duration of the terminal hospitalization, intensive care unit (ICU) days, intravenous antibiotics, magnetic resonance imaging/computed tomography scans, oncological treatment in the last month of life, and documentation of the dying phase. Standard descriptive statistics were used to describe the data, and differences between the case and control groups were tested using Fisher's exact test for categorical variables and the Mann–Whitney U test for numerical data.

Results:

In total, 213 dyads were identified. The average daily costs were three times lower in the palliative group (4392.4 CZK per day = 171.3 EUR) than in the nonpalliative group (13992.8 CZK per day = 545.8 EUR), and the difference was probably associated with the shorter time spent in the ICU (16% vs. 33% of hospital days).

Conclusions:

We showed that the integration of the palliative care team in the dying phase can be cost saving. These data could support the implementation of hospital palliative care in developing countries.

The Influence of Palliative Care in Hospital Length of Stay and the Timing of Consultation

BACKGROUND

Inpatient palliative care may reduce length-of-stay, costs, mortality, and prevent readmissions. Timing of consultation may influence outcomes. The aim of this study was to explore the timing of consultation and its influences patient outcomes.

METHOD

This retrospective study of hospital consultations between July 1, 2019 and December 31, 2019 compared patients seen within 72 hours of admission with those seen after 72 hours. Outcomes length of stay and mortality. Chi-square analyses for categorical variables and independent t-tests for continuous normally distributed variables were done. For nonparametrically distributed outcome variables, Wilcoxon rank sum test was used. For mortality, a time-to-event analysis was used. 30-day readmissions were assessed using the Fine-Gray sub-distribution hazard model. Multiple regression models were used, controlling for other variables.

RESULTS

696 patients were seen, 424 within 72 hours of admission. The average age was 73 and 50.6% were female. Consultation within 72 hours was not associated with a shorter stay for cancer but was for patients with non-cancer illnesses. Inpatient mortality and 30-days mortality were reduced but there was a higher 30-day readmission rate.

DISCUSSION

Palliative consultations within 72 hours of admission was associated with lower hospital stays and inpatient mortality but increased the risk of readmission. Benefits were largely observed in patients followed in continuity.

CONCLUSION

Early inpatient palliative care consultation was associated with reduced hospital mortality, 30-day mortality and length of stay particularly if patients were seen by palliative care prior to hospitalization.

Factors Associated with the Costs of Palliative Care: A Retrospective Cost Analysis at a University Cancer Hospital in Brazil

Background: There have been few studies evaluating the costs of palliative care (PC) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs), especially for patients with cancer. Objectives: The objective of this study was to identify the sociodemographic and clinical variables that could explain the cost per day of PC for cancer in Brazil. Methods: This was a retrospective cost analysis of PC at a quaternary cancer center in São Paulo, Brazil, between January 2010 and December 2013. Factors influencing the cost per day were assessed with generalized linear models and generalized linear-mixed models in which the random effect was the site of the cancer. Results: The study included 2985 patients. The mean total cost per patient was $12,335 (standard deviation [SD] = 14,602; 95% confidence interval [CI] = 11,803 to 12,851). The mean cost per day per patient was $325.50 (SD = 246.30, 95% CI = 316.60 to 334.30). There were statistically significant differences among cancer sites in terms of the mean cost per day. Multivariate analysis revealed that the drivers of cost per day were Karnofsky performance status, the number of hospital admissions, referral to PC, and place of death. Place of death had the greatest impact on the cost per day; death in a hospital and in hospice care increased the mean cost per day by $1.56 and $1.83, respectively. Conclusion: To allocate resources effectively, PC centers in LMICs should emphasize early enrollment of patients at PC outpatient clinics, to avoid hospital readmission, as well as advance planning of the place of death.

Does Time for (in)Direct Nursing Care Activities at the End of Life for Patients With or Without Specialized Palliative Care in a University Hospital Differ? A Retrospective Analysis

BACKGROUND

Nurses' end of life (EoL) care focuses on direct (eg, physical) and indirect (e,g, coordination) care. Little is known about how much time nurses actually devote to these activities and if activities change due to support by specialized palliative care (SPC) in hospitalized patients.

AIMS

(1) Comparing care time for EoL patients receiving SPC to usual palliative care (UPC);(2) Comparing time spent for direct/indirect care in the SPC group before and after SPC.

METHODS

Retrospective observational study; nursing care time for EoL patients based on tacs® data using nonparametric and parametric tests. The Swiss data method tacs measures (in)direct nursing care time for monitoring and cost analyses.

RESULTS

Analysis of tacs® data (UPC, n = 642; SPC, n = 104) during hospitalization before death in 2015. Overall, SPC patients had higher tacs® than UPC patients by 40 direct (95% confidence interval [CI]: 5.7-75, P = .023) and 14 indirect tacs® (95% CI: 6.0-23, P < .001). No difference for tacs® by day, as SPC patients were treated for a longer time (mean number of days 7.2 vs 16, P < .001).Subanalysis for SPC patients showed increased direct care time on the day of and after SPC (P < .001), whereas indirect care time increased only on the day of SPC.

CONCLUSIONS

This study gives insight into nurses' time for (in)direct care activities with/without SPC before death. The higher (in)direct nursing care time in SPC patients compared to UPC may reflect higher complexity. Consensus-based measurements to monitor nurses' care activities may be helpful for benchmarking or reimbursement analysis.