RESUMO
Objective: We assessed financial toxicity (FT) among Chinese patients with cancer and investigated associated risk factors guided by a multilevel conceptual framework. Methods: Applying multistage stratified sampling, we selected six tertiary and six secondary hospitals across three economically diverse provinces in China. From February to October 2022, 1208 patients with cancer participated. FT was measured using the COmprehensive Score for financial Toxicity (COST), with 28 potential risk factors identified at multilevel. Multiple regression analysis was used for risk factor identification. Results: FT prevalence was 82.6% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 80.5%, 84.8%), with high FT (COST score ≤ 18.5) observed in 40.9% of participants (95% CI: 38.1%, 43.7%). Significant risk factors included younger age at cancer diagnosis, unmarried status, low annual household income, negative impact of cancer on participants' or family caregiver's work, advanced cancer stage, longer hospital stay for cancer treatment or treatment-related side effects, high perceived stress, poor emotional/informational support, lack of social medical insurance or having urban and rural resident basic medical insurance, lack of commercial medical insurance, tertiary hospital treatment, and inadequate cost discussions with healthcare providers (all P < 0.05). Conclusions: Cancer-related FT is prevalent in China, contributing to disparities in cancer care access and health-related outcomes. The risk factors associated with cancer-related FT encompasses multilevel, including patient/family, provider/practice, and payer/policy levels. There is an urgent need for collective efforts by patients, healthcare providers, policymakers, and insurers to safeguard the financial security and well-being of individuals affected by cancer, promoting health equities in the realm of cancer care.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Ultrasound-guided cannulation of deep mid-arm veins by a modified Seldinger (US-Seldinger) technique has been demonstrated to yield better puncture success rates and lower postoperative complication rates than direct cannulation of superficial veins near the elbow with a short peripheral cannula and peripherally inserted central catheter (PICC) insertion through the cannula (non-US conventional method). Economic factors have been evaluated across different operators (i.e. nurses, radiologists, and general practitioners) and different venous catheter types (i.e. PICCs vs. central venous catheters). However, to our knowledge, data describing the economic evaluation on the aforementioned modified Seldinger technique are lacking. Hence, the aim of this study was to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of US-Seldinger technique (experimental group) compared with that of the non-US conventional method based on direct vein visualization (control group). RESULTS: A cohort of 360 subjects were assigned randomly to the experimental and control groups. Cost-effectiveness ratio (CER) analyses indicated that the effectiveness index (EI) for the experimental group was 89.29% (final CER = 3732.75), whereas that for the control group was 59.18% (final CER = 2492.98). CONCLUSION: The US-Seldinger technique was found to be more cost-effective than the non-US conventional method. These findings support the use of the former in place of the traditional latter technique as a routine puncture technique and suggest that the update would improve intravenous therapy treatment for patients needing PICCs. This study should serve as a reference for national healthcare policy. Trial registration ChiCTR-TRC-14004993.