Dataset Information

Economic Analysis of Hospital Palliative Care: Investigating Heterogeneity by Noncancer Diagnoses.

ABSTRACT: Background. Single-disease-focused treatment and hospital-centric care are poorly suited to meet complex needs in an era of multimorbidity. Understanding variation in palliative care's association with treatment choices is essential to optimizing interdisciplinary decision making in care of complex patients. Aim. To estimate the association between palliative care and hospital costs by primary diagnosis and multimorbidity for adults with one of six life-limiting conditions: heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), liver failure, kidney failure, neurodegenerative conditions including dementia, and HIV/AIDS. Methods. Data from four studies (2002-2015) were pooled to provide an analytic dataset of 73,304 participants with mean costs $10,483, of whom 5,348 (7%) received palliative care. We estimated average effect of palliative care on direct hospital costs among the treated, using propensity scores to control for observed confounding. Results. Palliative care was associated with a statistically significant reduction in total direct costs for heart failure (estimated treatment effect: -$2666; 95% confidence interval [CI]: -$3440 to -$1892), neurodegenerative conditions (-$3523; -$4394 to -$2651), COPD (-$1613; -$2217 to -$1009), kidney failure (-$3589; -$5132 to -$2045), and liver failure (-$7574; -$9232 to -$5916). The association for liver failure patients was statistically significantly larger than for any other disease group. Cost-saving associations were also statistically larger for patients with multimorbidity than single disease for two of the six groups: neurodegenerative and liver failure. Conclusions. Heterogeneity in treatment effect estimates was observable in assessing association between palliative care and hospital costs for adults with serious life-limiting illnesses other than cancer. The results illustrate the importance of careful definition of palliative care populations in research and practice, and raise further questions about the role of interdisciplinary decision making in treatment of complex medical illness.

SUBMITTER: May P

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6737878 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Jul-Dec

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Economic Analysis of Hospital Palliative Care: Investigating Heterogeneity by Noncancer Diagnoses.

May Peter P Normand Charles C Del Fabbro Egidio E Fine Robert L RL Morrison R Sean RS Ottewill Isabel I Robinson Chessie C Cassel J Brian JB

MDM policy & practice 20190701 2

<b>Background.</b> Single-disease-focused treatment and hospital-centric care are poorly suited to meet complex needs in an era of multimorbidity. Understanding variation in palliative care's association with treatment choices is essential to optimizing interdisciplinary decision making in care of complex patients. <b>Aim.</b> To estimate the association between palliative care and hospital costs by primary diagnosis and multimorbidity for adults with one of six life-limiting conditions: heart f ...[more]

PMID: 31535032

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Despite the great advances in the concept of palliative care (PC) and its benefits, its application seems to be delayed, leaving unfulfilled the many needs of patients and family members. One way to overcome this difficulty could be to develop a new training programme by palliative care specialists to improve PC primary skills in healthcare professionals. The aim of this study was to evaluate the training's impact on trainees within a hospital setting using Kirkpatrick's and Moore's models. METHODS:We adopted a mixed-method evaluation with concurrent triangulation. The evaluation followed the first three steps of Kirkpatrick's and Moore's models and included a pre- and post-training evaluation through self-administered questionnaires and focus groups. We used the McNemar statistical test. RESULTS:The results highlighted the significant amount of knowledge acquired by the hospital professionals after training, in terms of increasing their knowledge of palliative care and in terms of the change in meaning that they attributed to phenomena related to chronicity and incurability, which they encounter daily in their professional practice. In both quantitative and qualitative research, the results, in synthesis, highlight: (i) the development of a new concept of palliative care, centred on the response to the holistic needs of people; (ii) that palliative care can also be extended to non-oncological patients in advanced illness stages (our training was directed to Geriatrics and Nephrology/Dialysis professionals); (iii) the empowerment and the increase in self-esteem that healthcare professionals gained, from learning about the logistical and structural organization of palliative care, to activate and implement PC; (iv) the need to share personal aspects of their professional life (this result emerges only in qualitative research); (v) the appreciation of cooperation and the joining of multiple competences towards a synergistic approach and enhanced outcomes. CONCLUSION:It is necessary to further develop rigorous research on training evaluation, at the most complex orders of the Kirkpatrick and Moore models, to measure primary PC skills in health care professionals. This will develop the effectiveness of the integration of I- and II-level palliative care competencies in hospitals and improve outcomes of patients' and families' quality of life.

Project description:BackgroundMultistate models have become increasingly useful to study the evolution of a patient's state over time in intensive care units ICU (e.g. admission, infections, alive discharge or death in ICU). In addition, in critically-ill patients, data come from different ICUs, and because observations are clustered into groups (or units), the observed outcomes cannot be considered as independent. Thus a flexible multi-state model with random effects is needed to obtain valid outcome estimates.MethodsWe show how a simple multi-state frailty model can be used to study semi-competing risks while fully taking into account the clustering (in ICU) of the data and the longitudinal aspects of the data, including left truncation and right censoring. We suggest the use of independent frailty models or joint frailty models for the analysis of transition intensities. Two distinct models which differ in the definition of time t in the transition functions have been studied: semi-Markov models where the transitions depend on the waiting times and nonhomogenous Markov models where the transitions depend on the time since inclusion in the study. The parameters in the proposed multi-state model may conveniently be computed using a semi-parametric or parametric approach with an existing R package FrailtyPack for frailty models. The likelihood cross-validation criterion is proposed to guide the choice of a better fitting model.ResultsWe illustrate the use of our approach though the analysis of nosocomial infections (ventilator-associated pneumonia infections: VAP) in ICU, with "alive discharge" and "death" in ICU as other endpoints. We show that the analysis of dependent survival data using a multi-state model without frailty terms may underestimate the variance of regression coefficients specific to each group, leading to incorrect inferences. Some factors are wrongly significantly associated based on the model without frailty terms. This result is confirmed by a short simulation study. We also present individual predictions of VAP underlining the usefulness of dynamic prognostic tools that can take into account the clustering of observations.ConclusionsThe use of multistate frailty models allows the analysis of very complex data. Such models could help improve the estimation of the impact of proposed prognostic features on each transition in a multi-centre study. We suggest a method and software that give accurate estimates and enables inference for any parameter or predictive quantity of interest.

Project description:ImportancePalliative care improves health outcomes, but studies of the differences in the delivery of palliative care to patients with different types of serious illness are lacking.ObjectiveTo examine the delivery of palliative care among adults in their last year of life who died of terminal noncancer illness compared with those who died of cancer.Design, setting, and participantsThis population-based cohort study used linked health administrative data of adults who received palliative care in their last year of life and died between January 1, 2010, and December 31, 2017, in Ontario, Canada.ExposuresCause of death (chronic organ failure, dementia, or cancer).Main outcomes and measuresComponents of palliative care delivery, including timing and location of initiation, model of care, physician mix, care settings, and location of death.ResultsA total of 145 709 adults received palliative care (median age, 78 years; interquartile range, 67-86 years; 50.7% female); 21 054 died of chronic organ failure (4704 of heart failure, 5715 of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 3785 of end-stage kidney disease, 579 of cirrhosis, and 6271 of stroke), 14 033 died of dementia, and 110 622 died of cancer. Palliative care was initiated earlier (>90 days before death) in patients with cancer (32 010 [28.9%]) than in those with organ failure (3349 [15.9%]; absolute difference, 13.0%) or dementia (2148 [15.3%]; absolute difference, 13.6%). A lower proportion of patients with cancer had palliative care initiated in the home (16 088 [14.5%]) compared with patients with chronic organ failure (6904 [32.8%]; absolute difference, -18.3%) or dementia (3922 [27.9%]; absolute difference, -13.4%). Patients with cancer received palliative care across multiple care settings (92 107 [83.3%]) more often than patients with chronic organ failure (12 061 [57.3%]; absolute difference, 26.0%) or dementia (7553 [53.8%]; absolute difference, 29.5%). Palliative care was more often delivered to patients with cancer (80 615 [72.9%]) using a consultative or specialist instead of a generalist model compared with patients with chronic organ failure (9114 [43.3%]; absolute difference, 29.6%) or dementia (5634 [40.1%]; absolute difference, 32.8%). Patients with cancer (42 718 [38.6%]) received shared palliative care more often from general practitioners and physicians with subspecialty training, compared with patients with chronic organ failure (3599 [17.1%]; absolute difference, 21.5%) or dementia (1989 [14.2%]; absolute difference, 24.4%).Conclusions and relevanceIn this cohort study, there were substantial patient- and practitioner-level differences in the delivery of palliative care across distinct types of serious illness. These patient- and practitioner-level differences have important implications for the organization and scaled implementation of palliative care programs, including enhancement of practitioner education and training and improvements in equitable access to care across all settings.

Project description:ImportanceThe evidence for palliative care exists predominantly for patients with cancer. The effect of palliative care on important end-of-life outcomes in patients with noncancer illness is unclear.ObjectiveTo measure the association between palliative care and acute health care use, quality of life (QOL), and symptom burden in adults with chronic noncancer illnesses.Data sourcesMEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and PubMed from inception to April 18, 2020.Study selectionRandomized clinical trials of palliative care interventions in adults with chronic noncancer illness. Studies involving at least 50% of patients with cancer were excluded.Data extraction and synthesisTwo reviewers independently screened, selected, and extracted data from studies. Narrative synthesis was conducted for all trials. All outcomes were analyzed using random-effects meta-analysis.Main outcomes and measuresAcute health care use (hospitalizations and emergency department use), disease-generic and disease-specific quality of life (QOL), and symptoms, with estimates of QOL translated to units of the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Palliative Care scale (range, 0 [worst] to 184 [best]; minimal clinically important difference, 9 points) and symptoms translated to units of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale global distress score (range, 0 [best] to 90 [worst]; minimal clinically important difference, 5.7 points).ResultsTwenty-eight trials provided data on 13 664 patients (mean age, 74 years; 46% were women). Ten trials were of heart failure (n = 4068 patients), 11 of mixed disease (n = 8119), 4 of dementia (n = 1036), and 3 of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (n = 441). Palliative care, compared with usual care, was statistically significantly associated with less emergency department use (9 trials [n = 2712]; 20% vs 24%; odds ratio, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.68-1.00]; I2 = 3%), less hospitalization (14 trials [n = 3706]; 38% vs 42%; odds ratio, 0.80 [95% CI, 0.65-0.99]; I2 = 41%), and modestly lower symptom burden (11 trials [n = 2598]; pooled standardized mean difference (SMD), -0.12; [95% CI, -0.20 to -0.03]; I2 = 0%; Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale score mean difference, -1.6 [95% CI, -2.6 to -0.4]). Palliative care was not significantly associated with disease-generic QOL (6 trials [n = 1334]; SMD, 0.18 [95% CI, -0.24 to 0.61]; I2 = 87%; Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Palliative Care score mean difference, 4.7 [95% CI, -6.3 to 15.9]) or disease-specific measures of QOL (11 trials [n = 2204]; SMD, 0.07 [95% CI, -0.09 to 0.23]; I2 = 68%).Conclusions and relevanceIn this systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials of patients with primarily noncancer illness, palliative care, compared with usual care, was statistically significantly associated with less acute health care use and modestly lower symptom burden, but there was no significant difference in quality of life. Analyses for some outcomes were based predominantly on studies of patients with heart failure, which may limit generalizability to other chronic illnesses.

Project description:BackgroundThe UK National Health Service is striving to improve access to palliative care for patients with advanced cancer however limited information exists on the level of palliative care support currently provided in the UK. We aimed to establish the duration and intensity of palliative care received by patients with advanced cancer and identify which cancer patients are missing out.MethodsRetrospective cancer registry, primary care and secondary care data were obtained and linked for 2474 patients who died of cancer between 2010 and 2012 within a large metropolitan UK city. Associations between the type, duration, and amount of palliative care by demographic characteristics, cancer type, and therapies received were assessed using Chi-squared, Mann-Whitney or Kruskal-Wallis tests. Multinomial multivariate logistic regression was used to assess the odds of receiving community and/or hospital palliative care compared to no palliative care by demographic characteristics, cancer type, and therapies received.ResultsOverall 64.6% of patients received palliative care. The average palliative care input was two contacts over six weeks. Community palliative care was associated with more palliative care events (p<0.001) for a longer duration (p<0.001). Patients were less likely to receive palliative care if they were: male (p = 0.002), aged 80 years or over (p<0.05), diagnosed with lung cancer (p<0.05), had not received an opioid prescription (p<0.001), or had not received chemotherapy (p<0.001). Patients given radiotherapy were more likely to receive community only palliative care compared to no palliative care (Odds Ratio = 1.49, 95% Confidence Interval = 1.16-1.90).ConclusionTimely supportive care for cancer patients is advocated but these results suggest that older patients and those who do not receive anti-cancer treatment or opioid analgesics miss out. These patients should be targeted for assessment to identify unmet needs which could benefit from palliative care input.

Dataset Information

Economic Analysis of Hospital Palliative Care: Investigating Heterogeneity by Noncancer Diagnoses.

Publications

Economic Analysis of Hospital Palliative Care: Investigating Heterogeneity by Noncancer Diagnoses.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets