Delivery Models and Health Economics of Supportive Care Services in England: A Multicentre Analysis.

AIMS: Improvements in cancer treatment have led to more people living with and beyond cancer. These patients have symptom and support needs unmet by current services. The development of enhanced supportive care (ESC) services may meet the longitudinal care needs of these patients, including at the end of life. This study aimed to determine the impact and health economic benefits of ESC for patients living with treatable but not curable cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective observational evaluation was undertaken over 12 months across eight cancer centres in England. ESC service design and costs were recorded. Data relating to patients' symptom burden were collected using the Integrated Palliative Care Outcome Scale (IPOS). For patients in the last year of life, secondary care use was compared against an NHS England published benchmark. RESULTS: In total, 4594 patients were seen by ESC services, of whom 1061 died during follow-up. Mean IPOS scores improved across all tumour groups. In total, £1,676,044 was spent delivering ESC across the eight centres. Reductions in secondary care usage for the 1061 patients who died saved a total of £8,490,581. CONCLUSIONS: People living with cancer suffer with complex and unmet needs. ESC services appear to be effective at supporting these vulnerable people and significantly reduce the costs of their care.

A Short Report Examining the Introduction of Routine Use of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures in a Mixed Oncology Population.

AIMS: People living with treatable but not curable cancer often experience a range of symptoms related to their cancer and its treatment. During the COVID-19 pandemic, face-to-face consultations were reduced and so remote monitoring of these needs was necessary. University Hospitals Sussex implemented the routine use of electronic remote patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) in a mixed oncology population, focusing on those with treatable but not curable cancers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Over a 9-month period, patients were invited to register with My Clinical Outcomes (MCO) - a secure online platform for the collection of electronic PROMs. They were prompted by e-mail to complete assessments (EORTC QLQ-C30, EQ-5D-3L and EQ-5D VAS) routinely every 2 weeks. The team monitored patient scores and changes in these prompted clinical interventions. RESULTS: In total, 324 patients completed at least one assessment. The median number of assessments completed by each patient was eight. The most represented tumour groups were secondary breast (28%), prostate (25%) and other (32%). Median scores for the assessments did not deteriorate in a clinically or numerically significant way for patients living with non-curable conditions for the majority of patients monitored. CONCLUSION: Routine collection of electronic remote PROMs is an effective and useful strategy to provide real-time clinical feedback to teams. With integration into existing systems, online platforms (such as MCO) could provide efficient and patient-centred information for those providing care for people with cancer.