An evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of the different palliative care models available to cancer patients in Turkey

Cost-Effectiveness of Hospice Palliative Care for Patients With Cancer and Family Caregivers: A Multicenter Study in Kazakhstan

OBJECTIVES

In Kazakhstan, palliative care is offered through hospices, cancer centers, general hospitals, and mobile teams to approximately 107 000 patients in need. As a country with a transitional economy and a newly implemented social healthcare insurance system, Kazakhstan seeks a cost-effective allocation of limited resources for end-of-life care. This study aimed to assess cost-effectiveness of hospice-based palliative care for patients with cancer compared with the current standard of care provided in cancer centers across the country and, thereby, provide a better understanding for policy making regarding palliative care.

METHODS

A total of 182 family caregivers were recruited, 104 from 3 hospices and 78 from 3 palliative care units of cancer centers. Patients' state of health and family caregivers' burden were assessed with the Palliative Outcome Scale and the Zarit Burden Interview. Direct medical and nonmedical costs and family caregivers' out-of-pocket expenses associated with palliative care were collected. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analysis was conducted by generating 1000 resamples using bootstrapping with Monte-Carlo simulation.

RESULTS

After 14 days of inpatient palliative care, patients' mean Palliative Outcome Scale score was 2.5 points better in the hospice group than the cancer center group. Family caregiver burden was 4.5 points better in the hospice group. Mean treatment costs were $31 lower for the hospice group. There was a statistically significant correlation between the total cost of treatment and patients' quality of life (r = 0.58). Probabilistic sensitivity analysis showed that hospice-based care has better outcomes and lower costs than care provided in cancer centers in 80% of tested scenarios.

CONCLUSION

Hospice-based palliative care is cost-effective compared with the care provided in palliative units of cancer centers in resource-limited settings in Kazakhstan.

Does health economics research align with the disease burden in the Middle East and North Africa region? A systematic review of economic evaluation studies on public health interventions

INTRODUCTION

Economic evaluation studies demonstrate the value of money in health interventions and enhance the efficiency of the healthcare system. Therefore, this study reviews published economic evaluation studies of public health interventions from 26 Middle East and North Africa (MENA) countries and examines whether they addressed the region's major health problems.

METHODS

PubMed and Scopus were utilized to search for relevant articles published up to June 26, 2021. The reviewers independently selected studies, extracted data, and assessed the quality of studies using the Consolidated Health Economic Evaluation Reporting Standards (CHEERS) checklist.

RESULTS

The search identified 61 studies. Approximately half (28 studies; 46%) were conducted in Israel and Iran. The main areas of interest for economic evaluation studies were infectious diseases (21 studies; 34%), cancers (13 studies; 21%), and genetic disorders (nine studies; 15%). Five (8%), 39 (64%), 16 (26%), and one (2%) studies were classified as excellent, high, average, and poor quality, respectively. The mean of CHEERS checklist items reported was 80.8% (SD 14%). Reporting the structure and justification of the selected model was missed in 21 studies (37%), while price and conversion rates and the analytical methods were missed in 21 studies (34%).

CONCLUSIONS

The quantity of economic evaluation studies on public health interventions in the MENA region remains low; however, the overall quality is high to excellent. There were obvious geographic gaps across countries regarding the number and quality of studies and gaps within countries concerning disease prioritization. The observed research output, however, did not reflect current and upcoming disease burden and risk factors trends in the MENA region.

Progress in palliative care for cancer in Turkey: a review of the literature

BACKGROUND

The demographic transition in Turkey is shifting the burden of diseases towards non-communicable diseases including cancer. Palliative care (PC) as a component of Universal Health Coverage assures patient and family-centred care provision throughout the spectrum of cancer.

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to make a detailed evaluation of the progress achieved since the mid-90s and the current situation of cancer PC in Turkey.

METHODS

A literature review was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, Embase, ScienceDirect, Web of Science, Google Scholar, The Turkish Academic Network and Information Centre databases, Ministry of Health documents, Council of Higher Education's thesis 01/1995 to 07/2020. The information was categorised into the six domains: history of the cancer PC; law and regulations; education and research; opioid use; patient care and palliative centres; public awareness, psychosocial support and end of life ethics.

RESULTS

Of 27,489 studies, 331 met the inclusion criteria. The majority were published in the Turkish language and were journal articles. The findings showed that the development of PC in Turkey can be divided into three stages: early initiatives before 2000, the dissemination stage, 2000-2010 and the advanced stage after 2010. There is evidence of progress in terms of legal regulations, opioid use and number of PC services and research output. However, there is still a need for improvement in professional education, public awareness and end of life care.

CONCLUSION

There is evidence of progress, barriers and opportunities. However, bringing research into practice is needed for scale-up and integration of PC in cancer care in Turkey.

Home Based Palliative Care: Known Benefits and Future Directions

Purpose of Review

To summarize key recent evidence regarding the impact of Home-Based Palliative Care (HBPalC) and to highlight opportunities for future study.

Recent Findings

HBPalC is cost effective and benefits patients and caregivers across the health care continuum.

Summary

High-quality data support the cost effectiveness of HBPalC. A growing literature base supports the benefits of HBPalC for patients, families, and informal caregivers by alleviating symptoms, reducing unwanted hospitalizations, and offering support at the end of life. Numerous innovative HBPalC models exist, but there is a lack of high-quality evidence comparing specific models across subpopulations. Our wide literature search captured no research regarding HBPalC for underserved populations. Further research will also be necessary to guide quality standards for HBPalC.