Suppr超能文献

模式重要吗?姑息治疗病房比咨询更能节省成本。

Does Modality Matter? Palliative Care Unit Associated With More Cost-Avoidance Than Consultations.

机构信息

Trinity College Dublin, Ireland.

James J. Peters VA Medical Center, Bronx, New York, USA; Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, USA.

出版信息

J Pain Symptom Manage. 2018 Mar;55(3):766-774.e4. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2017.08.011. Epub 2017 Aug 23.

Abstract

CONTEXT

Inpatient palliative care (PC) is associated with reduced costs, but the optimal model for providing inpatient PC is unknown.

OBJECTIVES

To estimate the effect of palliative care consultations (PCCs) and care in a palliative care unit (PCU) on cost of care, in comparison with usual care (UC) only and in comparison with each other.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study, using multinomial propensity scoring to control for observed confounding between treatment groups. Participants were adults admitted as inpatients between 2009 and 2015, with at least one of seven life-limiting conditions who died within a year of admission (N = 6761).

RESULTS

PC within 10 days of admission is estimated to reduce costs compared with UC in the case of both PCU (-$6333; 95% CI: -7871 to -4795; P < 0.001) and PCC (-$3559; 95% CI: -5732 to -1387; P < 0.001). PCU is estimated to reduce costs compared with PCC (-$2774; 95% CI: -5107 to -441; P = 0.02) and length of stay compared with UC (-1.5 days; -2.2 to -0.9; P < 0.001). The comparatively larger effect of PCU over PCC is not observable when the treatment groups are restricted to those who received PC early in their admission (within six days).

CONCLUSION

Both PCU and PCC are associated with lower hospital costs than UC. PCU is associated with a greater cost-avoidance effect than PCC, except where both interventions are provided early in the hospitalization. Both timely provision of PC for appropriate patients and creation of more PCUs may decrease hospital costs.

摘要

背景

住院姑息治疗(PC)与降低成本有关,但提供住院 PC 的最佳模式尚不清楚。

目的

与仅接受常规护理(UC)相比,以及与彼此相比,评估姑息治疗咨询(PCC)和姑息治疗病房(PCU)护理对护理成本的影响。

方法

使用多项倾向评分匹配来控制治疗组之间的观察性混杂,这是一项回顾性队列研究。参与者为 2009 年至 2015 年期间住院的成年人,患有七种生命有限的疾病中的至少一种,且在入院后一年内死亡(N=6761)。

结果

与 UC 相比,入院后 10 天内接受 PC 被估计可降低成本,包括 PCU(-6333 美元;95%CI:-7871 至-4795;P<0.001)和 PCC(-3559 美元;95%CI:-5732 至-1387;P<0.001)。与 PCC 相比,PCU 被估计可降低成本(-2774 美元;95%CI:-5107 至-441;P=0.02)和延长住院时间(-1.5 天;-2.2 至-0.9;P<0.001)。当将治疗组限制为在入院后早期(六天内)接受 PC 的患者时,PCU 相对于 PCC 的更大效果是不可观察到的。

结论

PCU 和 PCC 均与 UC 相比降低了医院成本。PCU 与 UC 相比,避免成本的效果更大,除非两者都在住院期间尽早进行。及时为适当的患者提供 PC 并创建更多的 PCU 可能会降低医院成本。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/64e5/5860672/41ec6fda2940/nihms922134f4.jpg

相似文献

6
Economic Evaluation of a Hospital-Based Palliative Care Program.一项基于医院的姑息治疗项目的经济评估。
J Oncol Pract. 2017 May;13(5):e408-e420. doi: 10.1200/JOP.2016.018036. Epub 2017 Apr 18.

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验