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

M. Maessen, M. Fliedner, B. Gahl, Marina Maier, Daniel M. Aebersold, Susanne Zwahlen, S. Eychmüller
{"title":"An economic evaluation of an early palliative care intervention among patients with advanced cancer","authors":"M. Maessen, M. Fliedner, B. Gahl, Marina Maier, Daniel M. Aebersold, Susanne Zwahlen, S. Eychmüller","doi":"10.57187/s.3591","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"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.\nOBJECTIVES: 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.\nMETHODS: 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.\nRESULTS: 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).\nCONCLUSION: 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.\nClinical Trials. gov Identifier: NCT01983956","PeriodicalId":509527,"journal":{"name":"Swiss Medical Weekly","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-02-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Swiss Medical Weekly","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.57187/s.3591","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

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
对晚期癌症患者早期姑息治疗干预措施的经济评估
背景:将姑息治疗尽早纳入肿瘤治疗已显示出对病人症状和生活质量的积极影响。它还可以降低医疗成本。然而,鉴于环境和干预措施的异质性,以及缺乏有关影响医疗利用率和成本的最小有效剂量的信息,早期姑息关怀是否能降低成本仍不确定:我们试图确定,在瑞士的一家医院中,将早期姑息关怀干预纳入常规肿瘤治疗中,与单纯的常规肿瘤治疗相比,是否能降低生命最后一个月的医疗利用率和成本。我们从医疗保险管理数据中提取了成本,并从家庭照护者调查中提取了医疗服务的使用情况,对两种研究方法进行了比较:常规肿瘤治疗和常规肿瘤治疗加姑息治疗干预。干预措施包括与患者就症状、临终决定、网络建设和对照护者的支持(SENS)进行单一结构的多专业对话。早期姑息治疗干预是在肿瘤分期被诊断为不适合或不适合根治性治疗的16周内进行的。结果:我们的经济评估研究纳入了58名晚期癌症患者。干预组患者生命最后一个月的总体医疗费用中位数为7892瑞士法郎(四分位数范围:5637-13489瑞士法郎),对照组为8492瑞士法郎[5411-12012瑞士法郎]。每位患者的平均干预治疗总费用为 380 瑞士法郎。将早期姑息关怀干预纳入常规肿瘤治疗后,干预组和对照组的医疗使用率和总医疗费用无显著差异(P = 0.98)。结论:虽然早期姑息关怀通常被视为一种可降低成本的医疗服务,但我们并未发现 SENS 干预对生命最后一个月的医疗使用率和成本有显著影响。然而,这可能是由于干预的强度不够、时间太短或研究人群太少,因而无法产生可衡量的效果。患者对干预措施表示赞赏。单一结构的早期姑息关怀干预在临床实践中很容易实施,而且治疗成本低。有关早期姑息关怀经济影响的进一步研究应侧重于提取大型、详细的成本数据库,以显示成本和成本效益的潜在变化:NCT01983956
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信