Commentary: Is there a model for demonstrating a beneficial financial impact of initiating a palliative care program by an existing hospice program?

2004 ◽  
Vol 2 (4) ◽  
pp. 419-423 ◽  
Author(s):  
STEVEN D. PASSIK ◽  
CAROL RUGGLES ◽  
GRETCHEN BROWN ◽  
JANET SNAPP ◽  
SUSAN SWINFORD ◽  
...  

The value of integrating palliative with curative modes of care earlier in the course of disease for people with life threatening illnesses is well recognized. Whereas the now outdated model of waiting for people to be actively dying before initiating palliative care has been clearly discredited on clinical grounds, how a better integration of modes of care can be achieved, financed and sustained is an ongoing challenge for the health care system in general as well as for specific institutions. When the initiative comes from a hospital or academic medical center, which may, for example, begin a palliative care consultation service, financial benefits have been well documented. These palliative care services survive mainly by tracking cost savings that can be realized in a number of ways around a medical center. We tried to pilot 3 simple models of potential cost savings afforded to hospice by initiating a palliative care program. We found that simple models cannot capture this benefit (if it in fact exists). By adding palliative care, hospice, while no doubt improving and streamlining care, is also taking on more complex patients (higher drug costs, shorter length of stay, more outpatient, emergency room and physician visits). Indeed, the hospice was absorbing the losses associated with having the palliative care program. We suggest that an avenue for future exploration is whether partnering between hospitals and hospice programs can defray some of the costs incurred by the palliative care program (that might otherwise be passed on to hospice) in anticipation of cost savings. We end with a series of questions: Are there financial benefits? Can they be modeled and quantified? Is this a dilemma for hospice programs wanting to improve the quality of care but who are not able on their own to finance it?

2013 ◽  
Vol 13 (2) ◽  
pp. 179-186 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jackie Williams-Reade ◽  
Angela L. Lamson ◽  
Sharon M. Knight ◽  
Mark B. White ◽  
Sharon M. Ballard ◽  
...  

AbstractObjective:Due to multiple issues, integrated interdisciplinary palliative care teams in a neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) may be difficult to access, sometimes fail to be implemented, or provide inconsistent or poorly coordinated care. When implementing an effective institution-specific neonatal palliative care program, it is critical to include stakeholders from the clinical, operational, and financial worlds of healthcare. In this study, researchers sought to gain a multidisciplinary perspective into issues that may impact the implementation of a formal neonatal palliative care program at a tertiary regional academic medical center.Method:In this focused ethnography, the primary researcher conducted semistructured interviews that explored the perspectives of healthcare administrators, finance officers, and clinicians about neonatal palliative care. The perspectives of 39 study participants informed the identification of institutional, financial, and clinical issues that impact the implementation of neonatal palliative care services at the medical center and the planning process for a formal palliative care program on behalf of neonates and their families.Results:Healthcare professionals described experiences that influenced their views on neonatal palliative care. Key themes included: (a) uniqueness of neonatal palliative care, (b) communication and conflict among providers, (c) policy and protocol discrepancies, and (d) lack of administrative support.Significance of results:The present study highlighted several areas that are challenging in the provision of neonatal palliative care. Our findings underscored the importance of recognizing and procuring resources needed simultaneously from the clinical, operational, and financial worlds in order to implement and sustain a successful neonatal palliative care program.


2016 ◽  
Vol 24 (1) ◽  
pp. 47-55
Author(s):  
Savannah Lindsey ◽  
Laura Beth Parsons ◽  
Lindsay Rosenbeck Figg ◽  
Jill Rhodes

Introduction Monoclonal antibodies possess unique pharmacokinetic properties that permit flexible dosing. Increased use and high costs of these medications have led to the development of cost-containing strategies. This study aims to quantify the cost savings and clinical impact associated with dose rounding monoclonal antibodies to the nearest vial size. Methods This study was a single-arm, retrospective chart review assessing all monoclonal antibody doses dispensed at an outpatient community infusion center associated with an academic medical center between August 2014 and August 2015. All monoclonal antibody doses were reviewed to determine the cost of drug wasted using two methods. The waste-cost analysis described the amount of drug disposed of due to the use of partial vials. The theoretical dose savings described potential cost avoidance based on rounding the ordered dose to the nearest vial size. The theoretical rounded dose was compared to the actual ordered dose to explore clinical implications. Results A total of 436 doses were included. Of these, 237 were not rounded to the nearest vial size and included in the analysis. The cost of waste associated with these doses was $108,013.64 using actual wholesale price. The potential cost avoidance associated with the theoretical dose calculation was $83,595.53. Rounding these doses to the nearest vial size resulted in a median 6.7% (range, 1.4–20%) deviation from ordered dose. Conclusions Rounding monoclonal antibodies to the nearest vial size could lead to significant cost and waste savings with minimal deviation from the actual ordered dose.


2011 ◽  
Vol 2 (3) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ramy Elshaboury ◽  
Kathleen Green

Chemotherapy-induced nausea and vomiting (CINV) is a major adverse event associated with cancer treatments. There are clinical practice guidelines that assist practitioners in managing CINV. Many cancer centers develop protocols for physicians and pharmacists to guide prophylaxis and breakthrough treatments of CINV based on published guidelines. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the outcome differences between pharmacist and physician -driven management of CINV in adult hospitalized cancer patients in a large academic medical center. This is a single center retrospective chart review study. The primary outcome of the study was the number of breakthrough antiemetic doses needed throughout the hospitalization. A total of 106 adult patients receiving inpatient chemotherapy were reviewed for CINV management. Fifty-five patients (52%) were managed according to the pharmacist-driven protocol, and fifty-one patients (48%) were managed by the physician. There was no difference between the two groups in the primary outcome. Patients in the pharmacist-managed group needed 6.4 breakthrough antiemetic doses; whereas, patients in the physician managed group needed 5.9 doses throughout the hospital stay (P-value = 0.7). No difference was seen when results were adjusted for length of hospitalization. There was a difference in adherence to the institution CINV guidelines favoring the pharmacist-driven approach (85% versus 33%, P < 0.0001). In conclusion, pharmacist-run protocol for CINV management was as effective as the standard of care. Protocols that are based on practice guidelines may offer the advantage of care standardization and potential cost savings.   Type: Student Project


2014 ◽  
Vol 32 (31_suppl) ◽  
pp. 150-150
Author(s):  
Michelle Tufaro ◽  
Jim Devries

150 Background: Hunterdon Palliative Care Program is a service owned and run by Hunterdon Medical Center, a non-profit, Magnet-recognized, community hospital of 178 beds for the residents of Hunterdon County in New Jersey. The program strives to provide the highest quality patient and family-centered care for seriously ill and terminal patients. Our goals include respect for patient autonomy, values and personal decisions, as well as minimizing of symptom distress, optimizing supportive interventions and services for patients and their families. The individual need of each patient is determined by an interdisciplinary process that includes the ongoing clarification of goals of care. In order to achieve this we have developed several tools to capture the unique needs of each patient and encourage a daily interdisciplinary process. Methods: Three tools were developed to incorporate and utilize the expertise of each individual team member which includes physicians, nurse practitioner, social worker, chaplain and a reiki master. Results: The tools are currently being used by all in-patient palliative care patients. The psych-social-spiritual assessment and care plan sheets are completed within 24 hours of the initial consultation. The documents are placed on the chart next to the written consult. Daily rounding sheets are placed in the progress notes section of the chart. All members of the patient’s treatment team are encouraged to utilize the forms. Both the care plan note and the daily rounding sheet include a section for input from other disciplines. A hot pink strip is located at the bottom of each sheet to make it easy for others to identify forms for integration into additional patient care plans. Conclusions: The Palliative Care Program was awarded Certification by The Joint Commission, with no recommendations for improvement! The interdisciplinary approach to a patient’s end of life needs was sited as "superior" for clinical documentation with special attention to the psycho-social spiritual assessment as a “best practice” standard.


2018 ◽  
Vol 32 (4) ◽  
pp. 212-215
Author(s):  
Ashley Bird ◽  
Steven Leach ◽  
Stephanie Houck ◽  
Kelly Robinson ◽  
Tiffany Lawson

Author(s):  
Esme Finlay ◽  
Michael W. Rabow ◽  
Mary K. Buss

Well-designed, randomized trials demonstrate that outpatient palliative care improves symptom burden and quality of life (QOL) while it reduces unnecessary health care use in patients with cancer. Despite the strong evidence of benefit and ASCO recommendations, implementation of outpatient palliative care, especially in community oncology settings, faces considerable hurdles. This article, which is based on published literature and expert opinion, presents practical strategies to help oncologists make a strong clinical and fiscal case for outpatient palliative care. This article outlines key considerations for how to build an outpatient palliative care program in an institution by (1) defining the scope and benefits; (2) identifying strategies to overcome common barriers to integration of outpatient palliative care into cancer care; (3) outlining a business case; (4) describing successful models of outpatient palliative care; and (5) examining important factors in design and operation of a palliative care clinic. The advantages and disadvantages of different delivery models (e.g., embedded vs. independent) and different methods of referral (triggered vs. physician discretion) are reviewed. Strategies to make the case for outpatient palliative care that align with institutional values and/or are supported by local institutional data on cost savings are included.


2014 ◽  
Vol 17 (12) ◽  
pp. 1328-1335 ◽  
Author(s):  
Christopher W. Kerr ◽  
Kathleen A. Donohue ◽  
John C. Tangeman ◽  
Amin M. Serehali ◽  
Sarah M. Knodel ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 50 (1) ◽  
pp. 217-236 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ian M. McCarthy ◽  
Chessie Robinson ◽  
Sakib Huq ◽  
Martha Philastre ◽  
Robert L. Fine

2007 ◽  
Vol 34 (S 2) ◽  
Author(s):  
R Jox ◽  
S Haarmann-Doetkotte ◽  
M Wasner ◽  
GD Borasio

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document