e18035 Background: The Oncology Care Model (OCM) captures patient costs in a 6-month episode triggered by administration of systemic therapy. Most breast cancer (BC) patients will receive systemic therapy, with variations depending on stage and hormonal status, which makes BC an ideal indication to study costs in the OCM. Practices earn performance based payments (PBP) if aggregate episodic expenditures are managed below set target prices. We investigated predictors for episodic expenditures exceeding target prices, thus reducing potential for PBP. Methods: We identified BC episodes with non-decedent beneficiaries attributable to our academic medical center from OCM Reconciliation Reports during 7/1/16-6/30/17. Cohorts were defined as episodes whose costs were above target (Cohort 1) and those below (Cohort 2). The Wilcoxon Rank-Sum test was used to compare actual and target episode expenditure between cohorts. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess association of maintaining costs below target due to various predictors. Results: A total of 369 episodes were included in the study, with 124 episodes in Cohort 1 and 245 in Cohort 2. Median actual and target episode expenditures were higher in Cohort 1 (actual: $23,466 vs. $2,691, p < 0.0001; target: $8,425 vs. $5,870, p < 0.0001). In multivariable logistic regression, episodes were more likely to be below target if novel therapies, Part B drugs, or inpatient admissions were not utilized, controlling for other predictors (see Table). Conclusions: Large disparities exist for both actual expenditures and target prices for BC episodes in the OCM. Novel therapies, Part B drugs, and inpatient admissions are negatively associated with maintaining episode expenditures below target. Risk-adjustments for these expenditures need to be overhauled in OCM to accurately capture costs associated with management of cancer patients, and provide practical target prices for institutions to continue delivery of value based care. [Table: see text]
109 Background: Oncology care, including drugs, represents a significant portion of US healthcare spending. Cost of Part B drugs has increased at a rate 5.7x that of overall Medicare spending (1997-2004). As a participant in the Oncology Care Model (OCM), we found drug costs represent a majority of our total costs. To reduce treatment (Tx) variability, our NCI-designated cancer center chose to implement pathways. Pathways are a clinical decision-support tool that use evidence-based care maps accounting for efficacy, toxicity and cost. At one institution, use of pathways contributed to $15k in savings for stage IV lung cancer Tx. We hypothesized pathway driven Tx standardization would favorably impact total chemotherapy (CTx) costs at the implementation site. Methods: In July 2018, we implemented pathways in Medical and Radiation Oncology for new starts or changes in Tx. Oncologists accessed the tool through our EMR, selected and placed orders for Tx. OCM quarterly data was used to compare 2 quarters immediately pre- and post-pathway implementation. The cancer-mix-adjusted Per-Member-Per-Month (PMPM) Allowed Amounts for CTx were compared between 3 groups; patients on-pathway, patients off-pathway and patients for which the pathways tool was not used (no utilization). PMPMs were evaluated pre- and post-implementation and an ANOVA test was used to evaluate significance of the difference between the two periods. Results: PMPM CTx costs decreased 4.6% between pre- and post-pathway implementation when oncologists followed pathways. By comparison, the off-pathway cohort and the no utilization groups had increases of 0.9% and 17.7% respectively. An evaluation of cost difference proved significant (p < .0001). Breast patients on-pathway had a cost decrease of 20%, compared to increases of 32% and 11% for off-pathway and no utilization groups, respectively. Conclusions: Pathway use reduced variation, a known contributor to healthcare costs, and therefore may be an effective cost control tool. Additional quarters of claims data is needed post-implementation to fully define the impact of pathways on total cost. [Table: see text]
Introduction: During the COVID-19 pandemic, telemedicine became an essential way to provide patient care. We assessed the feasibility, acceptability, and initial impact on health care disparities of using telemedicine in a large pediatric lipid clinic. Methods: Data were collected from a telemedicine (TM) cohort between 4/1/20-3/31/21 and compared to an in-person (IP) cohort between 1/1/19-3/13/20. Families participated in telemedicine visits through an online patient portal. Interpreter services were available. Family surveys were sent after each telemedicine visit; providers were surveyed monthly. We evaluated family and provider satisfaction, cancellation rates, travel-related time and costs, and visit duration (check-in to check-out). Data were analyzed using standard descriptive summaries and student’s t-test. Results: Five providers completed 784 lipid telemedicine visits, accounting for 79% of total visit volume between 4/1/20-3/31/21. Average age was 14 years (+/- 3.8 yrs) and 366 (46.7%) were male. Interpreters were used in 11 (1.4%) visits. Payor mix (Medicaid vs. commercial) was comparable between TM (19.9%) and IP cohorts (22.4%). Of 98 completed telemedicine family surveys, 18 (18.4%) noted technical difficulties; however, nearly all families were interested in future telemedicine visits. Sixteen monthly provider surveys were completed: 31% reported technical difficulties and rated telemedicine 9.1/10. The 48-hour cancellation rate decreased from 11% to 7% (IP and TM cohort, respectively, P < 0.018), with a decrease from 25% to 5% for Non-Hispanic Black patients ( P < .001). No show rates were consistent between cohorts at 2%. Total driving distance saved was 20,800 miles with an estimated travel-related savings of $11,440. Average visit time for IP cohort was 87.5 minutes compared to 39.5 minutes for the TM cohort. Conclusion: We found that using telemedicine in a pediatric lipid clinic is feasible, time efficient, and associated with travel-related time and cost savings. There was a significant decrease in 48-hour cancellation rates overall, most notably for Non-Hispanic Black patients. Future studies utilizing telemedicine in our clinic will evaluate the effect on long term cardiovascular risk and health care delivery.
6632 Background: The Oncology Care Model (OCM) is a 5-year demonstration project led by the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) to create a framework for the future of oncology care in the United States. More than half way through the project, our large, urban NCI-designated cancer center chose to focus on and invest in resources and personnel for patient navigation and the development of clinical pathways. Although navigation has shown to reduce emergency department (ED) visits by as much as 6% per quarter compared to non-navigated patients, sustaining it is a challenge because it is a nonbillable service. Clinical pathways are a tool to reduce care variation by addressing drug expenditures, and represent an opportunity to reduce outpatient costs by as much as 35% when patients are treated on pathway.3 Many OCM practices made similar investments and all are facing the question: How will the infrastructure and efforts developed during OCM be sustainable after the demonstration project ends? Methods: An analysis of average ED cost and utilization as well as drug expenditures was conducted using OCM feedback data (Q1-Q8). Total utilization of ED visits and ED admits were used to determine a projected annualized cost which was compared to a budgeted navigation team. Similarly, projected annualized drug expenditures were compared to the annual cost of the pathways tool. Results: We found that ED visits and ED admits would need to be reduced by 11% to cover navigation costs. Similarly, a 0.7% reduction in total drug expenditures would cover the cost of clinical pathways. The OCM data represents a timeframe prior to implementation of these programs and an average increase of 1.6% per quarter for ED admits, a 0.6% decrease in ED visits and 2.7% increase in drug expenditures. This will serve as a baseline to measure progress towards our sustainability targets. Conclusions: Long term sustainability of the infrastructure developed during OCM to support cancer care transformation will be dependent on reducing high cost and highly utilized services. Aligning impact areas with resources/tools to ensure sustainability is an approach that can help define targets for OCM practices.
Objectives: Real-world melanoma clinical practice is changing rapidly with the introduction of new treatments. This analysis examined patient-reported treatment patterns for melanoma in UK real-world practice, including choice and duration of treatment, consultation frequency, and application of treatment guidelines, in close to real-time. Methods: Adults with any type or stage of melanoma were recruited to an observational study exploring the real-world impact of melanoma, conducted in collaboration with the patient advocacy group Melanoma UK. Data were collected via a bespoke 'bring your own device' app co-created with patients and Melanoma UK. Informed consent was obtained via the app, and ethical approval was obtained. Participants answered one-time questions relating to treatment patterns: current and previous treatments (drugs and surgery), where they lived/were treated, and frequency of consultations. Data were analyzed using R software; statistical analysis aimed to identify associations between treatment and other patient characteristics, including demographics and Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group (ECOG) performance status. Treatment patterns were compared with current guidelines. Results: Of the 219 (total registered: 396) patients who specified current disease stage, 45% were stage 3 or 4; 83% reported a latest ECOG performance status of unknown or 0. Current real-world treatment of melanoma in the UK was broadly consistent with published guidance; immunotherapies dominated treatment at stage 4 (ipilimumab 35% patients; nivolumab 23% patients). 178 patients provided their location, allowing regional differences in treatment patterns to be identified. Radiotherapy was more common in North-(16% of patients) and South-West (14% of patients) regions, but was not used to treat any patients in the East Midlands and South-Central regions. Centers treating the most patients included the Christie, Royal Marsden and Nottingham Hospitals NHS Trusts. Conclusions: Melanoma treatment in the UK real-world setting broadly follows published guidelines. Availability of close to real-time data offers the opportunity to quickly identify any inequalities, improving care.
6537 Background: Evidence suggests that cancer patients who receive palliative care early in their disease have improved quality of life, decreased emergency department (ED) visits, and less aggressive end-of-life care. In 2017, the Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center at Jefferson established the Neu Center for Supportive Medicine and Cancer Survivorship (NCSMCS) as a model for integrated care in the outpatient setting for all cancer patients. A multidisciplinary team consisting of palliative care physicians, social work, psychology, and navigation conducts biopsychosocial screening and initiates a personalized care plan for each patient to clarify treatment goals and offer assistance. Objectives: To use biopsychosocial screening at specified time points to identify needs and evaluate the impact of supportive care as part of standardized oncology care regardless of stage. Methods: This assessment utilized Oncology Care Model (OCM) data for Jefferson Medicare patients between 7/1/16 to 7/31/18. Incidence of ED admits ED/Observation and admissions were evaluated as well as ICU utilization and advanced care planning. Poisson regression was used to generate incidence rate ratios (IRR) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) to facilitate the comparison of post- vs. pre- incidence rates of hospitalization. Results: The post-intervention hospital admissions decreased by 31% in NCSMCS (IRR 0.69; 95% CI 0.48-0.98) and by 10% in Non-NCSMCS (IRR 0.90; 0.84-0.96) and advanced care plans were more likely to be on file for NCSMCS (9.0% vs. 4.9%). The intensive care unit (ICU) admissions were decreased by 17% among Non-NCSMCS (IRR 0.83; 95% CI 0.74-0.93). The utilization rates for ED admissions were not statistically different among both the groups. Conclusions: The preliminary data is promising and impact will be monitored as the intervention is expanded. Reducing admissions has benefits from both a cost savings as well as quality of life perspective. Future analyses will consider the impact of the intervention on a patient’s quality of life.
45 Background: Despite a 2016 ASCO recommendation that patients with advanced cancer receive dedicated palliative care (PC) services, many patients are not referred and continue to receive chemotherapy and utilize high-acuity services near the end of life (EOL). Studies suggest that early PC involvement is associated with lower spending, acute care utilization, and chemotherapy administration at the EOL. The Sidney Kimmel Cancer Center participates in the Oncology Care Model (OCM), a CMS episode-based alternative payment model promoting high-value care. Using OCM-generated data, we evaluated the effect of PC visits on EOL outcomes. Methods: We identified OCM patients with episodes starting April 1, 2016-July 1, 2018 with GI and head & neck malignancies who had died, and determined whether patients who saw a PC provider had greater documentation of a code status (CS) before death, as well as lower spending and utilization of chemotherapy or acute care in the last 30 days of life. CMS spending data and dates of death were derived from OCM quarterly feedback, while all other data was compiled via chart review. CS was recorded at the start of the episode and at the time of death. Results: The study included 126 patients (median age 66 years), of whom 38% had a PC visit. 24% had only an inpatient (IP) PC consult, 6% only an outpatient (OP) visit, and 9% both IP & OP visits. More patients who saw PC had an initial CS documented (85%, vs 46% for no PC), and had a greater proportional increase in CS documentation before death (96% vs 53%). Despite similar rates at baseline, the final CS was significantly more likely to be “Do Not Resuscitate/Intubate” (DNR/DNI) among PC patients (79%, vs 28% for no PC). An initial CS of DNR/DNI was associated with lower mean ICU and total non-hospice spending in the last 30 days of life. Conclusions: This retrospective study in OCM patients found that PC intervention is associated with improved documentation of a CS and higher rates of DNR/DNI documentation before death. There is an association between an initial DNR/DNI CS and lower acute care spending. This data suggests a beneficial effect of early PC on utilization at the EOL in advanced cancer patients.
118 Background: Patients with advanced cancer have high rates of hospitalizations as a result of their oncologic care. Furthermore, these patients receive aggressive end of life care despite evidence that aggressive end of life care does not improves quality of life or outcomes for patients and is associated with worse bereavement adjustment for caregivers. The American Society of Clinical Oncology has endorsed several indicators of aggressive end of life care, but most striking is intensive care unit (ICU) admission within 30 days before death. Methods: Adult oncology patients who died within 30 days of hospitalization and/or admitted to the ICU from 10/2018-3/2019 at an academic medical center were evaluated. The cohort was identified using ICD-10 codes, EMR systems support, and manual chart review. Patient demographic data, cancer type, stage, line of therapy, code status, advanced care plan, prior admissions as well as other clinical characteristics were collected. Results: In total, 180 patients were included for analysis; 106 of which were admitted to the ICU. Of patients admitted to the ICU, 58 patients died (54.7%). Mean ECOG performance status was 1.24. Average number of admissions 3 and 6 months prior to death was 0.71 and 1.26. Thirty six percent of patients were on first or second-line chemotherapy. 41.37% of patients who died in the ICU had prolonged length of stay (>1 week). Only 34.48% were known to palliative care prior to admission and 12.06% of patients had advanced care plans in place at time of hospitalization. Palliative care was consulted on 32.75% of patients who died in the ICU. Ninety Three percent had their code status changed prior to death. Conclusions: Despite established recommendations to support otherwise, at our institution there continues to be high utilization of ICU care near the end of life. Previous admissions and ECOG status are poor predictors of death in this cohort. The majority of patients had relapsed and refractory disease. There was a low rate of advanced care planning or palliative care involvement prior to the patient’s hospitalization. Further interventions are underway to improve end of life planning in order to improve our quality of care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.