Uso de recursos y gasto en servicios sanitarios de personas con enfermedades crónicas avanzadas en Cataluña / The use of resources and health expenditures by people with advanced chronic diseases in Catalonia

No disponible

Expanding Palliative Medicine across Care Settings: One Health System Experience.

BACKGROUND: The success of our hospital-based Palliative Care program stimulated requests to duplicate the program across the health system continuum of care. OBJECTIVE: To develop a model of care focused on a high-need, high-cost population that could be implemented across all care settings, including hospitals and patients' homes. METHODS: To fiscally support program expansion from hospital to home, we conducted a retrospective cost analysis for home-based Palliative Care (HBPC)-enrolled patients with continuous claims months before program enrollment through date of death. The HBPC enrollees were evaluated against a cohort group of CMS (Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Service) and Medicare Advantage patients who did not participate in the HBPC program (n = 3135). Twenty-one months of claims leading up to the date of death were evaluated for both populations. The analysis was designed to test whether Palliative Care patients demonstrated less overall claims expense and service utilization in the same periods as patients without Palliative Care. Claim months were grouped into three-month clusters for evaluation and statistical testing of per member per month utilization and cost. RESULTS: Overall, HBPC patients demonstrated significantly less service utilization and cost in the months leading up to death. Cost differences were primarily driven by clear cost divergence in the last three months of life [$9,843 (PC) vs. $27,530 (C)]. Our program grew from a hospital-based program to include the establishment of a home-based program. CONCLUSION: Palliative Care programs can successfully expand outside hospital walls to serve a high need/high-cost patient population.

An Update: NIH Research Funding for Palliative Medicine, 2011-2015.

BACKGROUND: The evidence base to support palliative care clinical practice is inadequate and opportunities to improve the palliative care evidence base remain despite the field's rapid growth. OBJECTIVE: To examine current NIH funding of palliative medicine research, changes since our 2013 report, and trends since our 2008 report. DESIGN: We sought to identify NIH funding of palliative medicine from 2011 to 2015 in two stages: (I) we searched the NIH grants database "RePorter" for grants with key words "palliative care," "end-of-life care," "hospice," and "end of life" and (II) we identified palliative care researchers likely to have secured NIH funding using three strategies. METHODS: We abstracted (1) the first and last authors' names from original investigations published in major palliative medicine journals from 2013 to 2015; (2) these names from a PubMed-generated list of original articles published in major medicine, nursing, and subspecialty journals using the above key words; and (3) palliative medicine journal editorial board members and key members of palliative medicine initiatives. We crossmatched the pooled names against NIH grants funded from 2011 to 2015. RESULTS: The author and NIH RePorter search identified 854 and 419 grants, respectively. The 461 grants categorized as relevant to palliative medicine represented 334 unique PIs. Compared to 2006-2010, the number of NIH-funded junior career development awards nearly doubled (6.1%-10%), articles published in nonpalliative care specialty journals tripled (13%-37%), published palliative care researchers increased by 2.5-fold (839-2120), and NIH-funded original palliative medicine research articles doubled (21%-39%). CONCLUSIONS: Despite the challenging NIH funding climate, NIH funding to palliative care remained stable. The increase in early stage career development funding, palliative care investigators, and palliative medicine research published in nonpalliative medicine journals reflects important advances to address the workforce and evidence gaps. Further support for palliative care research is still needed.

Undergraduate curriculum in palliative medicine at Tampere University increases students' knowledge.

BACKGROUND: Education in palliative medicine (PM) at medical schools reveals wide variation despite the increasing importance of palliative care. Many universities present poor description of the benefits and detailed content of the total curriculum in PM. Using the recommendations of European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) as a reference, we evaluated the content and outcomes of the curriculum in PM at the University of Tampere, Finland. METHODS: We searched for a PM curriculum by examining the teaching offered by every specialty and compared it to EAPC recommendations. Students' knowledge was evaluated using a progress test over three consecutive years. RESULTS: We found 53.5 teaching hours addressing PM issues, which exceeds the recommendation of the EAPC. Basics, symptom management, ethics, and communication skills were well established, while education in psychosocial/spiritual aspects, teamwork and self-reflection failed to reach the recommendations. Out of the maximum of 4.0, the progress test mean scores in PM among the third, fourth, fifth and sixth year students were 0.1 (SD 0.71), 0.69 (SD 1.28), 1.38 (SD 1.46) and 2.53 (SD 1.26), respectively (p < 0.001). This growing knowledge was associated with the timely increase in teaching provided through the PM discipline. In addition, the students who completed the optional PM course achieved better mean scores (2.66; SD 1.27) than the others (1.33; SD 1.43) (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The curriculum in PM at the University of Tampere is integrated into the teaching of many disciplines and complied well with the EAPC recommendations. This education led to increasing knowledge in PM among medical students.

Economic (gross cost) analysis of systematically implementing a programme of advance care planning in three Irish nursing homes.

BACKGROUND: Although advance care planning (ACP) and the use of advanced care directives (ACD) and end-of-life care plans are associated with a reduction in inappropriate hospitalisation, there is little evidence supporting the economic benefits of such programmes. We assessed the economic impact (gross savings) of the Let Me Decide (LMD) ACP programme in Ireland, specifically the impact on hospitalisations, bed days and location of resident deaths, before and after systematic implementation of the LMD-ACP combined with a palliative care education programme. METHODS: The LMD-ACP was introduced into three long-term care (LTC) facilities in Southern Ireland and outcomes were compared pre and post implementation. In addition, 90 staff were trained in a palliative care educational programme. Economic analysis including probabilistic sensitivity analysis was performed. RESULTS: The uptake of an ACD or end-of-life care post-implementation rose from 25 to 76%. Post implementation, there were statistically significant decreases in hospitalisation rates from baseline (hospitalisation incidents declined from 27.8 to 14.6%, z = 3.96, p < 0.001; inpatient hospital days reduced from 0.54 to 0.36%, z = 8.85, p < 0.001). The percentage of hospital deaths also decreased from 22.9 to 8.4%, z = 3.22, p = 0.001. However, length of stay (LOS) increased marginally (7-9 days). Economic analysis suggested a cost-reduction related to reduced hospitalisations ranging between €10 and €17.8 million/annum and reduction in ambulance transfers, estimated at €0.4 million/annum if these results were extrapolated nationally. When unit costs and LOS estimates were varied in scenario analyses, the expected cost reduction owing to reduced hospitalisations, ranged from €17.7 to €42.4 million nationally. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of the LMD-ACP (ACD/end-of-life care plans combined with palliative care education) programme resulted in reduced rates of hospitalisation. Despite an increase in LOS, likely reflecting more complex care needs of admitted residents, gross costs were reduced and scenario analysis projected large annual savings if these results were extrapolated to the wider LTC population in Ireland.

Top ten inpatient palliative medicine billing and coding mistakes (and how to fix them this week).

Palliative care (PC) has undergone incredible growth in the last 10 years, having gained subspecialty status and penetration into 85% of hospitals over 300 beds. The comprehensive services provided by multiple members of the PC team combined with low reimbursement for nonprocedural medical care challenges all PC teams to operate with financial sustainability. Accurately and compliantly documenting and coding services provided to patients can help to maximize PC programs' revenues and limit operating subsidies received from health care systems or hospice programs. In this article we share common billing and coding mistakes made by our programs and colleagues while providing inpatient, consultative palliative care. Each mistake is explained and paired with a straightforward fix to enable compliant, efficient practice. This will allow clinicians to more accurately communicate to payers the complex care provided to inpatients by the PC team. This fuller picture of the complexity of care provided can increase reimbursements received by your PC program from payers. Understanding how to accurately document, code, and receive appropriate reimbursement will allow our field to continue to grow, broadening the reach of PC nationally to improve quality of life for all patients and families in need.