Dataset Information

Community-based specialist palliative care teams and health system costs at end of life: a retrospective matched cohort study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Access to community-based specialist palliative care teams has been shown to improve patients' quality of life; however, the impact on health system expenditures is unclear. This study aimed to determine whether exposure to these teams reduces health system costs compared with usual care.

Methods

We conducted a retrospective matched cohort study in Ontario, Canada, using linked administrative data. Decedents treated by 1 of 11 community-based specialist palliative care teams in 2009/10 and 2010/11 (the exposed group) were propensity score matched (comorbidity, extent of home care, etc.) 1 to 1 to similar decedents in usual care (the unexposed group). The teams are comprised of a core group of specialized physicians, nurses and other providers; their role is to manage symptoms around the clock, provide education and coordinate care. Our primary outcome was the overall difference in health system costs (among 5 health care sectors) between all matched pairs of exposed versus unexposed patients in the last 30 days of life.

Results

The total cohort of decedents included 3109 matched pairs. Among matched pairs, the mean health system cost difference was $512 (95% confidence interval [CI] -$641 to -$383) lower in the last 30 days among exposed than among unexposed patients. In the last 30 days, the mean home care costs of the exposed group were $189 higher (95% CI -$151 to $227) than those of the unexposed group, but their mean hospital costs were $733 lower (95% CI -$950 to -$516).

Interpretation

Our study suggests that health system costs are lower for patients who have access to community-based specialist teams than for those who receive usual care alone, largely because of decreased hospital costs. Ensuring access to in-home palliative care support, as provided by these teams, is an efficacious strategy for reducing health care expenditures at the end of life.

SUBMITTER: Seow H

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6375224 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jan-Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Community-based specialist palliative care teams and health system costs at end of life: a retrospective matched cohort study.

Seow Hsien H Salam-White Lialoma L Bainbridge Daryl D

CMAJ open 20190101 1

<h4>Background</h4>Access to community-based specialist palliative care teams has been shown to improve patients' quality of life; however, the impact on health system expenditures is unclear. This study aimed to determine whether exposure to these teams reduces health system costs compared with usual care.<h4>Methods</h4>We conducted a retrospective matched cohort study in Ontario, Canada, using linked administrative data. Decedents treated by 1 of 11 community-based specialist palliative care ...[more]

PMID: 30755414

Similar Datasets

Project description:Background/aimsThe use and costs of health care rise substantially in the months prior to death, and although the use of palliative care services may be expected to lead to less costly care, the evidence is mixed. We analysed the costs of care over the last year of life and the extent to which these are associated with the use and duration of specialist palliative care (SPC) for decedents who died from cancer or another life-limiting illness.MethodsThe decedents were participants in a cohort study of older residents of the state of New South Wales, Australia. Using linked survey and administrative health data from 2007 to 2016, two cohorts were identified: n = 10,535 where the cause of death was cancer; and n = 11,179 where the cause of death was another life-limiting illness. Costs of various types were analysed with separate risk-adjusted linear regression models for the last 1, 3, 6, 9 and 12 months before death and for both cohorts. SPC was categorised according to time to death from first contact with the service as 1-7 days, 7-30 days, 30-180 days and more than 180 days.ResultsSPC use was higher among the cancer cohort (30.0%) relative to the non-cancer cohort (4.8%). The mean costs over the final year of life were AU$55,037 (SD 45,059) for the cancer cohort and AU$35,318 (SD 41,948) for the non-cancer cohort. Earlier use of SPC was associated with higher costs over the last year of life but lower costs in the last 1 and 3 months for both cohorts. Initiating SPC use more than 180 days before death was associated with a mean difference relative to the no SPC group of AU$15,590 (95% CI 10,617 to 20,562) and AU$13,739 (95% CI 733 to 26,746) over the last year of life for those dying from cancer and another illness, respectively. The same differences over the last month of life were - AU$2810 (95% CI - 3945 to - 1676) and - AU$4345 (95% CI - 6625 to - 2066). Admitted hospital care was the major driver of costs, with longer SPC associated with lower rates of death in hospital for both cohorts.ConclusionEarly initiation of SPC was associated with higher costs over the last year of life and lower costs over the last months of life. This was the case for both the cancer and non-cancer cohorts, and appeared to be largely attributed to reduced hospitalisation. Although further investigation is required, our results suggest that expanding the availability of SPC services to provide more equitable access could enable patients to spend more time at their usual place of residence, reduce pressure on inpatient services and facilitate death at home when that is preferred.

Project description:BackgroundAccess to hospice palliative care may improve quality of life, reduce the use of potentially aggressive end-of-life care and allow for death to occur outside of an acute care hospital. The aim of this study was to examine the impact of an ambulatory hospice palliative care program on end-of-life care compared to care received by a matched control group of deceased patients.MethodsThis retrospective study included patients who received hospice palliative care through the Symptom Management Program in Sudbury, Ontario, during 2012-2015. Using linked administrative health records, we defined a propensity-matched control group and derived 4 previously defined variables associated with aggressive end-of-life care (chemotherapy received in the last 2 wk of life, > 1 emergency department visit within 30 d of death, > 1 hospital admission within 30 d of death and at least 1 intensive care unit admission within 30 d of death). We also examined place of death. We measured family/caregiver satisfaction with care 3 months after the patient's death using the FAMCARE questionnaire.ResultsOf 914 eligible decedents enrolled in the Symptom Management Program, 754 (82.5%) were matched. Receiving care through the program was protective for most measures of aggressive end-of-life care (absolute risk reduction [ARR] 12.73, 95% confidence interval [CI] 12.65-12.81 for any end-of-life care outcome) and death in an acute care setting (ARR 19.89, 95% CI 19.78-20.00). Of the 450 family caregivers invited to complete the FAMCARE questionnaire, 190 (42.2%) returned completed surveys; following data linkage and matching, 96 (21.3%) were available for analysis. Satisfaction with care received within the program appeared high (mean total score 85.72/100).InterpretationProvision of hospice palliative care through this ambulatory program was associated with lower use of aggressive end-of-life care and death outside of an acute care hospital. Improving access could be expected to provide positive benefits at the individual and system level.

Project description:ObjectivesTo evaluate the impact of palliative home care support on the quality of care and costs in the last 14 days of life.DesignMatched cohort study using linked administrative databases.SettingAll people who died in Belgium in 2012 (n=107 847).Participants8837 people who received palliative home care support in the last 720 to 15 days of life matched 1:1 by propensity score to 8837 people who received usual care.InterventionReceiving the allowance for palliative home patients, multidisciplinary palliative home care team visit or palliative nurse or physiotherapist visit at home.Main outcome measuresHome death, number of family physician contacts, number of primary caregiver contacts, hospital death, hospital admission, intensive care unit (ICU) admission, emergency department (ED) admission, diagnostic testing, blood transfusion and surgery. Total inpatient and outpatient costs. All outcomes were measured in the last 14 days of life.ResultsIn the unmatched cohort, 11 149 (13.5%) people received palliative home care support in the last 720 to 15 days of life. After matching, those using palliative home care support had, compared with those who did not, more family physician contacts (mean 3.1 [SD=6.5] vs 0.8 [SD=1.2]), more chance of home death (56.2%vs13.8%; relative risk [RR]=4.08, 95% CI 3.86 to 4.31), lower risk of hospital admission (27.4%vs60.8%; RR=0.45, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.46), ICU admission (18.3%vs40.4%; RR=0.45, 95% CI 0.43 to 0.48) or ED admission (15.2%vs28.1%; RR=0.54, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.57). Mean total costs of care were lower for those using palliative home care support (€3081 [95% CI €3025 to €3136] vs €4698 [95% CI €4610 to €4787]; incremental cost: -€1617 [p<0.001]).ConclusionsPalliative home care support use positively impacts quality of care and reduces total costs of care at the end of life in Belgium. Policy makers and healthcare practitioners should increasingly focus on communicating the existing options for palliative home care support to patients and their caregivers.

Project description:The increasing demand for palliative care in New Zealand presents a potential threat to the quality of service delivery. One strategy to overcome this is through the implementation of valid and reliable patient-reported outcome measures. This mixed-methods study aimed to (1) implement measurement-based palliative care (MBPC) in a community palliative care service in Auckland, New Zealand; (2) evaluate the clinical utility of MBPC perceived by clinicians; (3) describe patient characteristics as measured by the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale (IPOS), the Australasian Modified Karnofsky Performance Scale (AKPS), and Phase of Illness (POI); and (4) evaluate the internal consistency of the IPOS. Participants were over 18 years of age from a community outpatient palliative care service. In a phased approach to implementation, healthcare staff were educated on each instrument used for patient assessment. Uptake and internal consistency were evaluated through descriptive statistics. An interpretive descriptive methodology was used to explore the clinical utility of MBPC through semi-structured interviews with seven clinical staff members. Individual patient assessments (n = 1507) were undertaken predominantly on admission, with decreasing frequency as patients advanced through to the terminal phase of their care. Mean total IPOS scores were 17.97 (SD = 10.39, α = 0.78). The POI showed that 65% of patients were in the stable phase, 20% were in the unstable phase, 9% were in the deteriorating phase, and 2% were in the terminal phase. Clinicians reported that MBPC facilitated holistic and comprehensive assessments, as well as the development of a common interdisciplinary language. Clinicians expressed discomfort using the psychosocial and spiritual items. Measurement-based palliative care was only partially implemented but it was valued by staff and perceived to increase the quality of service delivery. Future research should determine the optimal timing of assessments, cultural responsivity for Māori and Pacific patients, and the role of MBPC in decision support for clinicians.

Project description:ObjectiveThe COVID-19 pandemic has highlighted ongoing challenges to optimal supportive end-of-life care for adults living in long-term care (LTC) facilities. A supportive end-of-life care approach emphasises family involvement, optimal symptom control, multidisciplinary team collaboration and death and bereavement support services for residents and families. Community-based and palliative care specialist physicians who visit residents in LTC facilities play an important role in supportive end-of-life care. Yet, perspectives, experiences and perceptions of these physicians remain unknown. The objective of this study was to explore barriers and facilitators to optimal supportive end-of-life palliative care in LTC through the experiences and perceptions of community-based and palliative specialist physicians who visit LTC facilities.DesignQualitative study using semi-structured interviews, basic qualitative description and directed content analysis using the COM-B (capability, opportunity, motivation - behaviour) theoretical framework.SettingResidential long-term care.Participants23 physicians who visit LTC facilities from across Alberta, Canada, including both in urban and rural settings of whom 18 were community-based physicians and 5 were specialist palliative care physicians.ResultsMotivation barriers include families' lack of frailty knowledge, unrealistic expectations and emotional reactions to grief and uncertainty. Capability barriers include lack of symptom assessment tools, as well as palliative care knowledge, training and mentorship. Physical and social design barriers include lack of dedicated spaces for death and bereavement, inadequate staff, and mental health and spiritual services of insufficient scope for the population.ConclusionFindings reveal that validating families' concerns, having appropriate symptom assessment tools, providing mentorship in palliative care and adapting the physical and social environment to support dying and grieving with dignity facilitates supportive, end-of-life care within LTC.

Dataset Information

Community-based specialist palliative care teams and health system costs at end of life: a retrospective matched cohort study.

Background

Methods

Results

Interpretation

Publications

Community-based specialist palliative care teams and health system costs at end of life: a retrospective matched cohort study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets