Economics Impede Growth of Supportive Care Services

VBCC - September 2012, Volume 3, No 6 - MASCC Symposium
Phoebe Starr

New York, NY—Supportive care is effective in improving outcomes, but the growth of supportive care programs is hampered by economics, explained Eduardo Bruera, MD, Chair, Palliative Care & Rehabili­tation Medicine, University of Texas M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, speaking at the 2012 Multinational Association of Suppor­tive Care in Cancer International Symposium. “Financial distress is a huge elephant in the room,” Dr Bruera stated.

More studies are needed to demonstrate dollar savings achieved by supportive care, but the optimal design of these studies is not clear. Direct costs and revenues have been identified, but the savings achieved by supportive care are not well known, Dr Bruera told the audience. Research in supportive care needs to be independent, so that the design of studies does not lead to bias.

The Economic Analysis Conundrum
“Some misconceptions related to economic analyses are that ‘cost-effective’ means cost-saving, low cost is economically attractive, large cost is economically unattractive, and that preventive therapies save money,” Dr Bruera commented.

The ideal design of studies to show cost-effectiveness of supportive care could include several outcomes—cost per life saved, cost per death averted, and reduction in symptom domains. The less expensive supportive care program may not turn out to be the best approach from an economic point of view. “A cheaper program could end up costing more in healthcare resource utilization in the end,” Dr Bruera stated.

Other considerations in demonstrating economic benefits include cost-utility analysis, outcomes, refractory symptoms requiring sedation, and hospitalization.

A cost-benefit analysis measures costs and health outcomes by assigning a dollar value to someone’s life or to symptoms.

Economic analyses should include the perspectives for the analysis (ie, society, the patient, and the institution), the rationale for costs included in the analysis, a description of the benefits and harms, discounting if costs and benefits accrue during different periods, an incremental cost analysis, and a sensitivity analysis.

When supportive care is initiated early, clinical outcomes are improved, which is economically attractive for payers, such as hospitals, health plans, and government agencies.

“We are moving to clinical outcomes that will have a dollar value. We are being told what those outcomes are, and we need to develop a way to show savings. But economic studies need to be done in the context of a specific healthcare system,” Dr Bruera noted.

Need for Comprehensive Inpatient Supportive Care Program
Dr Bruera emphasized that the environment in which supportive care is delivered is place-specific, and what works in one setting may not be a good fit in another. M.D. Anderson Cancer Center, where he works, is the only comprehensive inpatient supportive care program in the United States, he said.

In general, the environment in comprehensive cancer centers is more favorable for supportive care clinics than in noncomprehensive cancer centers. A recent survey suggested that approximately 50% of comprehensive cancer centers plan to increase supportive care services compared with 25% of noncomprehensive cancer centers.

In the United States, payment for services is being increasingly linked
to outcomes. The National Quality Forum recently identified 4 important outcomes related to payment—intensive care unit deaths, reduced admissions to the emergency department in the past 30 days, chemotherapy ad­ministered ≤14 days before death, and a reduction of overall payment.

Related Items
Tocilizumab Demonstrates Success in the Treatment of Patients with Giant Cell Arteritis
Phoebe Starr
VBCR - December 2016, Vol 5, No 6 published on January 5, 2017 in Giant Cell Arteritis
Rituximab Maintenance Outshines Azathioprine for Antineutrophil Cytoplasmic Autoantibody–Associated Vasculitis
Phoebe Starr
VBCR - December 2016, Vol 5, No 6 published on January 5, 2017 in Vasculitis
Cost of Drugs and Affordability Don’t Always Jibe
Phoebe Starr
VBCC - July 2016, Vol 7, No 6 published on July 13, 2016 in Value in Oncology
Usefulness of Vitamin D Supplementation Questioned in Patients with Knee Osteoarthritis
Phoebe Starr
VBCR - June 2016, Vol 5, No 3 published on July 7, 2016 in Osteoarthritis
Baricitinib Effective in Patients with Refractory Rheumatoid Arthritis
Phoebe Starr
VBCR - June 2016, Vol 5, No 3 published on July 7, 2016 in Rheumatoid Arthritis
Vaccine Uptake Remains Low in Patients with RA
Phoebe Starr
VBCR - June 2016, Vol 5, No 3 published on July 7, 2016 in Health & Wellness
Age, Smoking History Are Risk Factors for Early Organ Damage in Patients with SLE
Phoebe Starr
VBCR - June 2016, Vol 5, No 3 published on July 7, 2016 in Lupus
IL-6 Inhibitor Shows Promise in Patients with PsA
Phoebe Starr
VBCR - June 2016, Vol 5, No 3 published on July 7, 2016 in Psoriatic Arthritis
ESR1 Mutations Predict Worse Survival in ER-Positive Advanced Breast Cancer
Phoebe Starr
VBCC - June 2016, Vol 7, No 5 published on June 17, 2016 in Personalized Medicine
Early Results of Immunotherapy in Breast Cancer
Phoebe Starr
VBCC - June 2016, Vol 7, No 5 published on June 17, 2016 in Breast Cancer
Last modified: May 28, 2014
  • Rheumatology Practice Management
  • American Health & Drug Benefits
  • Value-Based Cancer Care
  • Value-Based Care in Myeloma
  • Value-Based Care in Neurology