Literature DB >> 16140364

Resource utilization for ovarian cancer patients at the end of life: how much is too much?

Sharyn N Lewin1, Barbara M Buttin, Matthew A Powell, Randall K Gibb, Janet S Rader, David G Mutch, Thomas J Herzog.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: End-of-life (EOL) medical care consumes 10-12% of national health care expenditures and 27% of Medicare dollars annually. Studies suggest that hospice services decrease EOL expenditures by 25-40%. The goal of this study was to compare the total cost of hospital-based resources utilized in ovarian cancer patients during their last 60 days of life for those enrolled in hospice versus those not on hospice.
METHODS: Study eligibility included patients who expired from ovarian cancer from 1999 to 2003. Medical records were reviewed for demographic data as well as treatment, response and recurrence rates, histologic type, grade and stage. Billing records were analyzed for costs of inpatient and outpatients visits, including radiologic, laboratory and pharmacy charges. Total cost of hospital resources was compared between patients managed on hospice for >10 days (hospice group) versus <10 days (non-hospice group) using the following methods: Mann-Whitney U, Kruskal-Wallis and Student's t tests. Overall survival was compared using Kaplan-Meier statistics.
RESULTS: Of the 84 patients analyzed, 67 (79.8%) were in the non-hospice group and 17 (20.2%) were in the hospice group. Demographic, histologic and staging characteristics as well as platinum sensitivity were similar between the two groups before the last 60 days of life. Mean number of chemotherapy cycles before the study period was also similar (20.4 and 21.0, respectively). However, during the study period, the mean total cost per patient in the non-hospice group was dollar 59,319 versus dollar 15,164 in the hospice group (P = 0.0001). A significant difference in cost was noted for mean inpatient days (dollar 6584 vs. dollar 1629, P = 0.0007), radiology (dollar 6063 vs. dollar 2343, P = 0.003), laboratory (dollar 12,281 vs. dollar 2026, P = 0.0004) and pharmacy charges (dollar 13,650 vs. dollar 4465, P = 0.0017) as well as for treating physician per patient (dollar 112,707 vs. dollar 34,677, P = 0.04). Overall survival for the two groups was the same.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings demonstrate that there is a significant cost difference with no appreciable improvement in survival between ovarian cancer patients treated aggressively versus those enrolled in hospice at the EOL. These data suggest that earlier hospice enrollment is beneficial. Furthermore, cost variations between physicians and patients imply that education may be an important variable.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2005        PMID: 16140364     DOI: 10.1016/j.ygyno.2005.07.102

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Gynecol Oncol        ISSN: 0090-8258            Impact factor:   5.482


  13 in total

Review 1.  Chemotherapy at end-of-life: an integration of oncology and palliative team.

Authors:  Wing-lok Chan; Ka-on Lam; Wai-kwan Siu; Kwok-keung Yuen
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2015-11-25       Impact factor: 3.603

2.  Chemotherapy in the last 30 days of life of advanced cancer patients.

Authors:  Paola Pacetti; Giovanni Paganini; Massimo Orlandi; Andrea Mambrini; M Cristina Pennucci; Alfonso Del Freo; Maurizio Cantore
Journal:  Support Care Cancer       Date:  2015-04-22       Impact factor: 3.603

3.  Advancing performance measurement in oncology: quality oncology practice initiative participation and quality outcomes.

Authors:  Francis X Campion; Leanne R Larson; Pamela J Kadlubek; Craig C Earle; Michael N Neuss
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2011-05       Impact factor: 3.840

4.  Trends in end-of-life care and health care spending in women with uterine cancer.

Authors:  Benjamin Margolis; Ling Chen; Melissa K Accordino; Grace Clarke Hillyer; June Y Hou; Ana I Tergas; William M Burke; Alfred I Neugut; Cande V Ananth; Dawn L Hershman; Jason D Wright
Journal:  Am J Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2017-07-11       Impact factor: 8.661

Review 5.  Contemporary quality of life issues affecting gynecologic cancer survivors.

Authors:  Jeanne Carter; Richard Penson; Richard Barakat; Lari Wenzel
Journal:  Hematol Oncol Clin North Am       Date:  2011-12-16       Impact factor: 3.722

6.  End-of-Life Racial and Ethnic Disparities Among Patients With Ovarian Cancer.

Authors:  Jolyn S Taylor; Suja S Rajan; Ning Zhang; Larissa A Meyer; Lois M Ramondetta; Diane C Bodurka; David R Lairson; Sharon H Giordano
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2017-04-07       Impact factor: 44.544

7.  Escalation of oncologic services at the end of life among patients with gynecologic cancer at an urban, public hospital.

Authors:  Eijean Wu; Anna Rogers; Lingyun Ji; Richard Sposto; Terry Church; Lynda Roman; Debu Tripathy; Yvonne G Lin
Journal:  J Oncol Pract       Date:  2015-01-20       Impact factor: 3.840

8.  Parents' views of cancer-directed therapy for children with no realistic chance for cure.

Authors:  Jennifer W Mack; Steven Joffe; Joanne M Hilden; Jan Watterson; Caron Moore; Jane C Weeks; Joanne Wolfe
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2008-09-08       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Considerations regarding the administration of systemic therapy for elderly patients with ovarian cancer.

Authors:  William P Tew
Journal:  Curr Treat Options Oncol       Date:  2013-03

10.  The role and timing of palliative medicine consultation for women with gynecologic malignancies: association with end of life interventions and direct hospital costs.

Authors:  Nicole S Nevadunsky; Sharon Gordon; Lori Spoozak; Anne Van Arsdale; Yijuan Hou; Merieme Klobocista; Serife Eti; Bruce Rapkin; Gary L Goldberg
Journal:  Gynecol Oncol       Date:  2013-10-29       Impact factor: 5.482

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.