Acute palliative care unit in a comprehensive cancer center (CCC): Financial and clinical outcomes

e20518 Background: Acute palliative care units (APCU) in CCCs improves symptom control for advanced cancer patients and supports their families. However, these services are not available in the majority of cancer centers. Concerns regarding financial reimbursements represent a major barrier for establishing APCUs. The purpose of this study is to report the clinical outcomes and compare the financial outcomes of our APCU as compared to other services at our CCC. Methods: We reviewed all admissions to the APCU over the last 5 fiscal years for demographic information, length of stay, discharges, survival, hospital billings and collection of charges, and compared these to the rest of the institution. Results: 2,510 unique patients were admitted to the APCU. Median age was 59 years (19–101) and 51% were female. The median length of stay in APCU was 8 days (Q1-Q3 6–10). Median survival of patients discharged home, to health care facilities and hospice were 53, 22, and 13 days, respectively (p<0.001, log rank test), with 6 month survival of 20%, 4%, and 2%, respectively. Professional collections ranged from 42–47% of charges for APCU, vs. 32–38% for rest of the CCC and were stable over the 5 year period. Hospital collections were 47–51% of charges for APCU, vs. 55–57% for the rest of the CCC. The payer mix included commercial 1155 (46%), Medicare 755 (30%), Medicaid 126 (5%), mixed 127 (5%), indigent 198 (8%), and others 149 (6%). Conclusions: The ACPU has reimbursement outcomes consistent with the American acute care model and comparable to the rest of the CCC for last 5 years. The APCU is as viable as any other clinical programs in our institution. Further research is needed to investigate possible reasons for lack of APCU in cancer centers. No significant financial relationships to disclose.

Download Full-text

Impact of a half-day multidisciplinary symptom control and palliative care outpatient clinic in a comprehensive cancer center on recommendations, symptom intensity, and patient satisfaction: A retrospective descriptive study

Journal of Pain and Symptom Management ◽

10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2003.10.011 ◽

2004 ◽

Vol 27 (6) ◽

pp. 481-491 ◽

Cited By ~ 106

Author(s):

Florian Strasser ◽

Catherine Sweeney ◽

Jie Willey ◽

Susanne Benisch-Tolley ◽

J.Lynn Palmer ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Palliative Care ◽

Patient Satisfaction ◽

Outpatient Clinic ◽

Symptom Control ◽

Descriptive Study ◽

Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽

Cancer Center ◽

Symptom Intensity

Download Full-text

Quality improvement outcomes in an academic practice participating in ASCO’s Quality Oncology Practice Initiative (QOPI).

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2012.30.34_suppl.206 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 30 (34_suppl) ◽

pp. 206-206

Author(s):

Mary Anne Fenton

Keyword(s):

Palliative Care ◽

Quality Control ◽

Quality Improvement ◽

Primary Care Physicians ◽

Symptom Control ◽

Well Being ◽

Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽

Cancer Center ◽

Academic Practice ◽

Improvement Interventions

206 Background: The ASCO QOPI is an instrument for community and academic practices to assess quality and adherence to guidelines in areas of treatment planning and goals, chemotherapy consent documentation, smoking cessation, symptom control, palliative care, and disease specific measures. Following data submission QOPI summary reports for the submitting practice and QOPI aggregate are available for review and comparison. Methods: The academic practice of Rhode Island Hospital Comprehensive Cancer Center has participated in QOPI since the fall of 2008. QOPI measure summary reports for our practice and comparison to the Academic Aggregate are reviewed by our physicians after each round of chart abstraction, measures are identified for improvement. Interventions include education on practice improvement and development of policy and procedures for implementation by our Quality Control Officer in compliance with hospital policies. Results: Presented is a summary of quality improvement interventions implemented. Additional areas of quality improvement have been identified based on QOPI data, and improvement plans are ongoing including treatment summaries for patient and primary care physicians, tools to assess patient emotional well being, documentation of family history and referral for genetic assessment. Conclusions: QOPI provides a platform for collection, analysis and comparison of quality measures. For the measures of formulating a pain plan the intervention was a reminder to document the plan. For the measure hospice enrollment, a reflection on our hospice enrollment has lead to an increase in referral to palliative care. The ASCO QOPI program is a tool for quality improvement, our Quality Control Officer was essential in implementation of our improvement projects. [Table: see text]

Download Full-text

External validation of the simple prognostic score in a palliative care clinic at a comprehensive cancer center.

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2012.30.15_suppl.e19566 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 30 (15_suppl) ◽

pp. e19566-e19566

Author(s):

Brinder Vij ◽

Stacy Marie Stabler ◽

Howard T. Thaler ◽

Paul A. Glare

Keyword(s):

Palliative Care ◽

Karnofsky Performance Status ◽

Prognostic Score ◽

External Validation ◽

Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽

Rank Test ◽

Cancer Center ◽

Cancer Type ◽

Care Clinic ◽

Percentage Difference

e19566 Background: Accurate survival predictions are essential for the optimal delivery of palliative care (PC). Clinical predictions of survival are notoriously inaccurate. Tools for making objective survival estimates in ambulatory cancer patients, who have months or years to live, are lacking. The Simple Prognostic Score (SPS) separated Canadian palliative radiotherapy patients into three groups with 12, 6 and 3 months median survivals, respectively. The aim of this study was to test the SPS in an outpatient PC clinic at a U.S. comprehensive cancer center. Methods: Retrospective chart review of 300 consecutive patients referred to one PC clinic at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center (MSKCC). Cancer type, metastatic sites and Karnofsky performance status (KPS) score were used to calculate SPS (1 point each for non-breast cancer; non-osseous metastases; KPS score <70%). Outcome was date of death, obtained from the MSKCC institutional data base. Survival analysis was performed. Discrimination (non-overlap between groups) and calibration (percentage difference between estimated and observed survival) were measures of accuracy. Results: 79% (236 of 300) patients had advanced disease. Of them, 90% had cancers other than breast; 76% had metastases in sites other than bone; 27% had a low KPS score. The SPS score was 2 or 3 in 80%. By 10/31/11, 85% had died (median survival 4.9 months). SPS categorized the sample into four prognostic subgroups (see Table), with median survivals of 15, 9, 5 and 2 months respectively (log rank test χ2=38.71, d.f .3, p<0.0001). SPS was not very accurate, with poor discrimination (extensive intergroup overlap) but reasonable calibration (6-15% for the different groups). Conclusions: The SPS is user-friendly and helpful at the group level, but inaccurate at the individual level. Additional variables may narrow the prediction intervals, but will make the tool more complex. [Table: see text]

Download Full-text

Palliative Care Inpatient Service in a Comprehensive Cancer Center: Clinical and Financial Outcomes

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2004.11.003 ◽

2004 ◽

Vol 22 (10) ◽

pp. 2008-2014 ◽

Cited By ~ 158

Author(s):

Ahmed Elsayem ◽

Kay Swint ◽

Michael J. Fisch ◽

J. Lynn Palmer ◽

Suresh Reddy ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Palliative Care ◽

Length Of Stay ◽

Hematologic Malignancy ◽

Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽

Cancer Center ◽

Inpatient Service ◽

Financial Outcomes ◽

Symptom Intensity ◽

Tertiary Hospitals ◽

The Mean

Purpose Inpatient palliative care units are unavailable in most cancer centers and tertiary hospitals. The purpose of this article is to review the outcomes of the first 344 admissions to the Palliative Care Inpatient Service (PCIS) at our comprehensive cancer center. Patients and Methods We retrospectively reviewed our computerized database for clinical and demographic information, length of stay, and hospital billing during the first year of the service's operation. Results Three hundred twenty patients were admitted during the study period. Their median age was 57 years. The main cancer diagnoses were thoracic or head and neck (44%), gastrointestinal (25%), and hematologic malignancy (8%). The main referral symptoms were pain (44%), nausea (41%), fatigue (39%), and dyspnea (38%). The median length of stay in the PCIS was 7 days (range, 1 to 58 days). Fifty-nine patients died while in the PCIS. However, the overall hospital mortality rate was not increased compared with that in the year before the establishment of the PCIS (3.58% v 3.59%). The mean reimbursement rate for all palliative care charges was approximately 57%, and the mean daily charges in the PCIS were 38% lower than the mean daily charges for the rest of the hospital. Symptom intensity data showed severe distress on admission and significant improvement in the main target symptoms. Most patients were discharged to a hospice. Conclusion The PCIS has been accepted in our tertiary cancer center on the basis of its clinical utility and financial viability.

Download Full-text

Cancerpedia: A Framework for Implementing Comprehensive Cancer Centres

Journal of Global Oncology ◽

10.1200/jgo.18.97800 ◽

2018 ◽

Vol 4 (Supplement 2) ◽

pp. 244s-244s

Author(s):

N. Abdelmutti ◽

A. Chudak ◽

M. Merali ◽

T. Sullivan ◽

M. Escaf ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Palliative Care ◽

Best Practices ◽

Cancer Care ◽

Care Delivery ◽

Cancer Control ◽

System Level ◽

Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽

Cancer Center ◽

Cancer Centers ◽

Comprehensive Cancer Centers

Background and context: Comprehensive cancer centers or programs form a nucleus of cancer care delivery. Although there are frameworks for population cancer control, no similar published framework exists for cancer centers. Aim: We sought to develop a framework for designing and implementing a comprehensive cancer center or program within the context of a population-based model of cancer control that spans diagnosis, treatment, supportive care, and palliative care as well as integration with primary care and the community. Strategy/Tactics: The framework was constructed with the patient at the center and provides a system-level perspective as well as a granular view of the fundamental resources and structures needed to build and maintain individual cancer centers and programs. Due to its breadth, we focused the framework on essential information while linking to a wide range of vetted publications that detail additional standards, guidelines and best practices. Program/Policy process: “Cancerpedia” emerged as a cohesive framework for the delivery of high-quality cancer care within and beyond the cancer center. It provides an overview of the cancer control and care delivery framework, describes cancer care services (e.g., radiotherapy, chemotherapy, palliative care) and details infrastructure and core services (e.g., physical facilities, human resources). In addition to these services, the framework presents guidelines for governance that ensure oversight and quality, describes the critical need for integrating education and research and presents the best practices for engaging in philanthropy. Cancerpedia also outlines the role of the comprehensive cancer center in integration with the community and influencing policy and regulation. Over 30 chapters provide a detailed description of each element and include a description of the service or function, resources requirements such as people, equipment and facilities, management structures, quality performance guidelines and future trends in innovation. Outcomes: To our knowledge, no comparable published framework exists as a reference for developing comprehensive cancer centers. Cancerpedia was designed to serve as a global public good and is adaptable and applicable to diverse contexts and healthcare environments. It is relevant to high-, middle- and low-income countries alike and provides a reference point from which to structure a plan for growth. What was learned: While it is important to describe the various elements required for cancer care delivery, it is critical to consider and address the integration and interdependencies of these various elements. Future opportunities for learning include seeking input from a global audience to gauge the utility and applicability of Cancerperdia to local contexts.

Download Full-text

Screening for Palliative Care: Implementation of the NCCN Guideline at a Comprehensive Cancer Center (418-A)

Journal of Pain and Symptom Management ◽

10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2011.12.123 ◽

2012 ◽

Vol 43 (2) ◽

pp. 387-388 ◽

Cited By ~ 1

Author(s):

Paul Glare ◽

Kathy Plakovic ◽

Barbara Egan ◽

David Kelsen

Keyword(s):

Palliative Care ◽

Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽

Cancer Center

Download Full-text

Antineoplastic therapy use in patients with advanced cancer admitted to an acute palliative care unit at a comprehensive cancer center

Cancer ◽

10.1002/cncr.24942 ◽

2010 ◽

Vol 116 (8) ◽

pp. 2036-2043 ◽

Cited By ~ 34

Author(s):

David Hui ◽

Ahmed Elsayem ◽

Zhijun Li ◽

Maxine De La Cruz ◽

J. Lynn Palmer ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Palliative Care ◽

Antineoplastic Therapy ◽

Advanced Cancer ◽

Palliative Care Unit ◽

Comprehensive Cancer Center ◽

Cancer Center

Download Full-text

Association of the neutrophil to eosinophil ratio with response to immunotherapy-based combinations in metastatic renal cell carcinoma.

Journal of Clinical Oncology ◽

10.1200/jco.2021.39.6_suppl.341 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 39 (6_suppl) ◽

pp. 341-341

Author(s):

Matthew D Tucker ◽

Katy Beckermann ◽

Kristin Kathleen Ancell ◽

Kerry Schaffer ◽

Renee McAlister ◽

...

Keyword(s):

Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽

Cell Carcinoma ◽

Clinical Outcomes ◽

Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma ◽

Renal Cell ◽

Objective Response ◽

Progression Free Survival ◽

Rank Test ◽

Cancer Center ◽

Exact Test

341 Background: Neutrophilia is known to be associated with worse prognosis in metastatic renal cell carcinoma (mRCC); however, less is known about the role of eosinophils in the response to immunotherapy (IO). We investigated the association of the baseline neutrophil to eosinophil ratio (NER) with outcomes to IO-based combination treatment in mRCC. Methods: Patients with mRCC treated with ipilimumab plus nivolumab, pembrolizumab plus axitinib, or avelumab plus axitinib at the Vanderbilt-Ingram Cancer Center were retrospectively identified. Patients on >10mg prednisone and patients with prior IO were excluded. Baseline NER (at time of first IO) and association with progression free survival (PFS), overall survival (OS), and objective response rate (ORR) were investigated. Data cutoff was 9/1/2020. Analysis for PFS and OS was performed using the log-rank test and Mantel-Haenszel method, and analysis of the odds ratio for ORR was performed using Fischer’s exact test. Results: Sixty-one patients were identified: 89% clear cell histology, 74% prior nephrectomy, 69% IMDC intermediate risk, and 72% treatment-naïve. Patients with baseline NER < median (N=31) had improved clinical outcomes compared to patients with baseline NER > median (N=30) (Table). Improvement in PFS by NER was maintained when stratified by anti-PD-1/CTLA-4 and anti-PD(L)-1/VEGF (p= 0.0062 and p= 0.049); however, differences in OS and ORR were no longer significant. The median baseline NER among patients with partial response (PR) was significantly lower at 22.7 (95% CI 18.9-31.1) vs. 51.6 (95% CI 39.5-93.1) among those with progressive disease (PD) (p= 0.0054). For comparison, the median neutrophil to lymphocyte ratio was not significantly different between PR (2.60) and PD (3.84, p= 0.056). Conclusions: Patients with a low baseline NER treated with IO-based combinations had improved clinical outcomes compared to patients with a high baseline NER. Additional investigation of this parameter in larger cohorts is warranted. [Table: see text]

Download Full-text