Resource use and costs at the end of life: essays on common ways to collect data on resource use and derive costs at the end of life in a UK setting

BACKGROUND: Within the given environment of scarce health care resources and increasing demands on the health care system, it is imperative to organise health care in the most efficient manner. Sustainability of the overall system, equity issues concerning access to care and a move to patient-centred care - informing the decision making process by patient needs, are current hot topics when considering care, from curative through to the end of life. The decision making process within UK’s health care sector is relying on a standardised approach including the benefits and the costs of interventions and "guarantees" that resources are used in a way, which provide best value. This approach falls short when looking at interventions at the end of life, jeopardising appropriate focus and attention for end of life and palliative care. AIM: The aim of the thesis is threefold: 1. Understanding the current landscape of ’resource use data collection’ and deriving costs at the end of life in an UK setting. 2. Reflect on the challenges, benefits and limitations of using administrative data versus trial data in an end of life care setting. 3. Present potential solutions to challenges arising in collecting and analysing cost of end of life care and recommendations for further research. METHODS: This work starts by highlighting why end of life care is an outlier when considering the measurement and allocation of health care resources. An update of a systematic review is then presented to identify current methodology used to capture resource use and cost assignment at the end of life. The benefits and limitations of using administrative data or clinical trial data to capture these components is then explored via a series of case studies. The administrative data studies are retrospective whole population secondary care administrative data linkage studies, capturing resources used in the last year prior to death. The first clinical trial is a two-arm parallel group cluster randomised (1:1) trial on pain assessment, the second, a feasibility trial of an Exercise and Nutrition-based Rehabilitation program at the end of life. RESULTS: Most of the results from the included studies are in line with the results of the systematic review. There is a wide variety of perspectives, approaches to resource use collection, costing sources and derivation of costs making a comparison between studies challenging. As the administrative data studies included whole population data, they provided novel insight into the main drivers of secondary care resource use in patients last year of life namely the cause of death being, despite age being a confounding factor, of greater importance than age itself. Further, some equity issues, related to rurality were proven, which was shown to be of bigger influence than deprivation. Different illnesses require various levels of care intensity and are therefore connected to specific care pathways, with cancer care showing an exceptionally high need for secondary care involvement. Both of the studies showed a massive increase in secondary care use with proximity to death, especially within the last three month. The two clinical trials included, showcase different approaches of increasing patients quality of life whilst keeping the impact on resource use low. Both of the trials confirmed secondary care use as the main driver of costs. The second, despite being a small scale feasibility trial, showing a considerable share of resource use falling outside secondary care, hence demonstrate the need to include multiple data sources when aiming to understand the “true cost” of end of life care. Data collection and costing within administrative data studies and clinical trials comes with specific benefits and limitations, some of which could potentially be addressed when combining data generated through trials with administrative data. CONCLUSION: Fair evidence based decision-making requires comprehensive knowledge of the current state of the system, being conscious of the costs and the benefits of interventions and having a system in place which enables comparing different interventions, which in itself requires a standardised way to capture costs and benefits. This thesis presents various examples of different approaches to resource use collection and applying costs. In order to be able to recommend at least a Scotland wide costing strategy for costing administrative datasets, more research is needed to understand the impact of different costing methods applied to the same dataset. Within clinical trials, collection of resource use data should be kept to a minimum in order to keep patient burden low. The development of a standardized questionnaire is recommended, highlighting the need for adaptability to different trials. Linkage between data collected from individual trials and administrative data is an appealing concept, offering extensive data whilst keeping the patient burden at a minimum. Looking at the current landscape of data protection regulations, there are yet some hurdles to overcome

Intensity of care in cancer patients in the last year of life: a retrospective data linkage study

BACKGROUND: Delivering high-quality palliative and end-of-life care for cancer patients poses major challenges for health services. We examine the intensity of cancer care in England in the last year of life. METHODS: We included cancer decedents aged 65+ who died between January 1, 2010 and December 31, 2017. We analysed healthcare utilisation and costs in the last 12 months of life including hospital-based activities and primary care. RESULTS: Healthcare utilisation and costs increased sharply in the last month of life. Hospital costs were the largest cost elements and decreased with age (0.78, 95% CI: 0.73–0.72, p < 0.005 for age group 90+ compared to age 65–69 and increased substantially with comorbidity burden (2.2, 95% CI: 2.09–2.26, p < 0.005 for those with 7+ comorbidities compared to those with 1–3 comorbidities). The costs were highest for haematological cancers (1.45, 95% CI: 1.38–1.52, p < 0.005) and those living in the London region (1.10, 95% CI: 1.02–1.19, p < 0.005). CONCLUSIONS: Healthcare in the last year of life for advanced cancer patients is costly and offers unclear value to patients and the healthcare system. Further research is needed to understand distinct cancer populations’ pathways and experiences before recommendations can be made about the most appropriate models of care

Variation in hospital cost trajectories at the end of life by age, multimorbidity and cancer type

Background Approximately thirty thousand people in Scotland are diagnosed with cancer annually, of whom a third live less than one year. The timing, nature and value of hospital-based healthcare for patients with advanced cancer are not well understood. The study's aim was to describe the timing and nature of hospital-based healthcare use and associated costs in the last year of life for patients with a cancer diagnosis. Methods We undertook a Scottish population-wide administrative data linkage study of hospital-based healthcare use for individuals with a cancer diagnosis, who died aged 60 and over between 2012 and 2017. Hospital admissions and length of stay (LOS), as well as the number and nature of outpatient and day case appointments were analysed. Generalised linear models were used to adjust costs for age, gender, socioeconomic deprivation status, rural-urban (RU) status and comorbidity. Results The study included 85,732 decedents with a cancer diagnosis. For 64,553 (75.3%) of them, cancer was the primary cause of death. Mean age at death was 80.01 (SD 8.15) years. The mean number of inpatient stays in the last year of life was 5.88 (SD 5.68), with a mean LOS of 7 days. Admission rates rose sharply in the last month of life. One year adjusted and unadjusted costs decreased with increasing age. A higher comorbidity burden was associated with higher costs. Major cost differences were present between cancer types. Conclusions People in Scotland in their last year of life with cancer are high users of secondary care. Hospitalisation accounts for a high proportion of costs, particularly in the last month of life. Further research is needed to examine triggers for hospitalisations and to identify influenceable reasons for unwarranted variation in hospital use among different cancer cohorts

A randomised, feasibility trial of an Exercise and Nutrition-based Rehabilitation programme (ENeRgy) in people with cancer

From Wiley via Jisc Publications RouterErna Haraldsdottir - ORCID: 0000-0003-4891-0743 https://orcid.org/0000-0003-4891-0743Background: Despite rehabilitation being increasingly advocated for people living with incurable cancer, there is limited evidence supporting efficacy or component parts. The progressive decline in function and nutritional in this population would support an approach that targets these factors. This trial aimed to assess the feasibility of an exercise and nutrition based rehabilitation programme in people with incurable cancer. Methods: We randomized community dwelling adults with incurable cancer to either a personalized exercise and nutrition based programme (experimental arm) or standard care (control arm) for 8 weeks. Endpoints included feasibility, quality of life, physical activity (step count), and body weight. Qualitative and health economic analyses were also included. Results: Forty‐five patients were recruited (23 experimental arm, 22 control arm). There were 26 men (58%), and the median age was 78 years (IQR 69–84). At baseline, the median BMI was 26 kg/m2 (IQR: 22–29), and median weight loss in the previous 6 months was 5% (IQR: −12% to 0%). Adherence to the experimental arm was >80% in 16/21 (76%) patients. There was no statistically significant difference in the following between trial arms: step count − median % change from baseline to endpoint, per trial arm (experimental −18.5% [IQR: −61 to 65], control 5% [IQR: −32 to 50], P = 0.548); weight − median % change from baseline to endpoint, per trial arm (experimental 1%[IQR: −3 to 3], control −0.5% [IQR: −3 to 1], P = 0.184); overall quality of life − median % change from baseline to endpoint, per trial arm (experimental 0% [IQR: −20 to 19], control 0% [IQR: −23 to 33], P = 0.846). Qualitative findings observed themes of capability, opportunity, and motivation amongst patients in the experimental arm. The mean incremental cost of the experimental arm versus control was £‐319.51 [CI −7593.53 to 6581.91], suggesting the experimental arm was less costly. Conclusions: An exercise and nutritional rehabilitation intervention is feasible and has potential benefits for people with incurable cancer. A larger trial is now warranted to test the efficacy of this approach.12pubpub

The 4 ‘A’s test for detecting delirium in acute medical patients: a diagnostic accuracy study

Background: Delirium is a common and serious neuropsychiatric syndrome, usually triggered by illness or drugs. It remains underdetected. One reason for this is a lack of brief, pragmatic assessment tools. The 4 ‘A’s test (Arousal, Attention, Abbreviated Mental Test – 4, Acute change) (4AT) is a screening tool designed for routine use. This project evaluated its usability, diagnostic accuracy and cost.Methods: Phase 1 – the usability of the 4AT in routine practice was measured with two surveys and two qualitative studies of health-care professionals, and a review of current clinical use of the 4AT as well as its presence in guidelines and reports. Phase 2 – the 4AT’s diagnostic accuracy was assessed in newly admitted acute medical patients aged ≥ 70 years. Its performance was compared with that of the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM; a longer screening tool). The performance of individual 4AT test items was related to cognitive status, length of stay, new institutionalisation, mortality at 12 weeks and outcomes. The method used was a prospective, double-blind diagnostic test accuracy study in emergency departments or in acute general medical wards in three UK sites. Each patient underwent a reference standard delirium assessment and was also randomised to receive an assessment with either the 4AT (n = 421) or the CAM (n = 420). A health economics analysis was also conducted.Results: Phase 1 found evidence that delirium awareness is increasing, but also that there is a need for education on delirium in general and on the 4AT in particular. Most users reported that the 4AT was useful, and it was in widespread use both in the UK and beyond. No changes to the 4AT were considered necessary. Phase 2 involved 785 individuals who had data for analysis; their mean age was 81.4 (standard deviation 6.4) years, 45% were male, 99% were white and 9% had a known dementia diagnosis. The 4AT (n = 392) had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.90. A positive 4AT score (&#x3e; 3) had a specificity of 95% [95% confidence interval (CI) 92% to 97%] and a sensitivity of 76% (95% CI 61% to 87%) for reference standard delirium. The CAM (n = 382) had a specificity of 100% (95% CI 98% to 100%) and a sensitivity of 40% (95% CI 26% to 57%) in the subset of participants whom it was possible to assess using this. Patients with positive 4AT scores had longer lengths of stay (median 5 days, interquartile range 2.0–14.0 days) than did those with negative 4AT scores (median 2 days, interquartile range 1.0–6.0 days), and they had a higher 12-week mortality rate (16.1% and 9.2%, respectively). The estimated 12-week costs of an initial inpatient stay for patients with delirium were more than double the costs of an inpatient stay for patients without delirium (e.g. in Scotland, £7559, 95% CI £7362 to £7755, vs. £4215, 95% CI £4175 to £4254). The estimated cost of false-positive cases was £4653, of false-negative cases was £8956, and of a missed diagnosis was £2067.Limitations: Patients were aged &#x22DD; 70 years and were assessed soon after they were admitted, limiting generalisability. The treatment of patients in accordance with reference standard diagnosis limited the ability to assess comparative cost-effectiveness.Conclusions: These findings support the use of the 4AT as a rapid delirium assessment instrument. The 4AT has acceptable diagnostic accuracy for acute older patients aged &#x3e; 70 years.Future work: Further research should address the real-world implementation of delirium assessment. The 4AT should be tested in other populations.Trial registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN53388093.Funding: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 40. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The funder specified that any new delirium assessment tool should be compared against the CAM, but had no other role in the study design or conduct of the study

The 4 'A's test for detecting delirium in acute medical patients : a diagnostic accuracy study

Background Delirium is a common and serious neuropsychiatric syndrome, usually triggered by illness or drugs. It remains underdetected. One reason for this is a lack of brief, pragmatic assessment tools. The 4 ‘A’s test (Arousal, Attention, Abbreviated Mental Test – 4, Acute change) (4AT) is a screening tool designed for routine use. This project evaluated its usability, diagnostic accuracy and cost. Methods Phase 1 – the usability of the 4AT in routine practice was measured with two surveys and two qualitative studies of health-care professionals, and a review of current clinical use of the 4AT as well as its presence in guidelines and reports. Phase 2 – the 4AT’s diagnostic accuracy was assessed in newly admitted acute medical patients aged ≥ 70 years. Its performance was compared with that of the Confusion Assessment Method (CAM; a longer screening tool). The performance of individual 4AT test items was related to cognitive status, length of stay, new institutionalisation, mortality at 12 weeks and outcomes. The method used was a prospective, double-blind diagnostic test accuracy study in emergency departments or in acute general medical wards in three UK sites. Each patient underwent a reference standard delirium assessment and was also randomised to receive an assessment with either the 4AT (n = 421) or the CAM (n = 420). A health economics analysis was also conducted. Results Phase 1 found evidence that delirium awareness is increasing, but also that there is a need for education on delirium in general and on the 4AT in particular. Most users reported that the 4AT was useful, and it was in widespread use both in the UK and beyond. No changes to the 4AT were considered necessary. Phase 2 involved 785 individuals who had data for analysis; their mean age was 81.4 (standard deviation 6.4) years, 45% were male, 99% were white and 9% had a known dementia diagnosis. The 4AT (n = 392) had an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.90. A positive 4AT score (> 3) had a specificity of 95% [95% confidence interval (CI) 92% to 97%] and a sensitivity of 76% (95% CI 61% to 87%) for reference standard delirium. The CAM (n = 382) had a specificity of 100% (95% CI 98% to 100%) and a sensitivity of 40% (95% CI 26% to 57%) in the subset of participants whom it was possible to assess using this. Patients with positive 4AT scores had longer lengths of stay (median 5 days, interquartile range 2.0–14.0 days) than did those with negative 4AT scores (median 2 days, interquartile range 1.0–6.0 days), and they had a higher 12-week mortality rate (16.1% and 9.2%, respectively). The estimated 12-week costs of an initial inpatient stay for patients with delirium were more than double the costs of an inpatient stay for patients without delirium (e.g. in Scotland, £7559, 95% CI £7362 to £7755, vs. £4215, 95% CI £4175 to £4254). The estimated cost of false-positive cases was £4653, of false-negative cases was £8956, and of a missed diagnosis was £2067. Limitations Patients were aged ≥ 70 years and were assessed soon after they were admitted, limiting generalisability. The treatment of patients in accordance with reference standard diagnosis limited the ability to assess comparative cost-effectiveness. Conclusions These findings support the use of the 4AT as a rapid delirium assessment instrument. The 4AT has acceptable diagnostic accuracy for acute older patients aged > 70 years. Future work Further research should address the real-world implementation of delirium assessment. The 4AT should be tested in other populations. Trial registration Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN53388093. Funding This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 23, No. 40. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The funder specified that any new delirium assessment tool should be compared against the CAM, but had no other role in the study design or conduct of the study