The business of palliative medicine—Part 2: The economics of acute inpatient palliative medicine

Abstract

Economic feasibility is a major factor in the viability of established acute inpatient palliative medicine. Several clinical, administrative, and financial parameters determine the financial health of inpatient care. Financial management metrics include case mix index (CMI) (as determined by the Federal Register as an assigned relative weight to the diagnosis-related group (DRG) reflecting resource consumption), direct costs, indirect costs, contribution margin, and in the future of all patient revised-DRG (APR-DRG). Both census and length of stay will have a major impact on these financial metrics. The type of patient referral and clinical decisions will influence direct costs and revenues. In the future, an international CMI or APR-DRG will allow palliative inpatient units to compare disease severity, resource utilization, and outcome measures.

Keywords

all patient refined case mix index contribution margin diagnosis-related group length of stay palliative medicine

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Bloomfield DJ , Krahn T , Neogi T , Panzarella TJ , Smith P , et al. : Economic evaluation for chemotherapy with mitoxantrone plus prednisone for symptomatic hormone-resistant prostate cancer: Based on a Canadian randomized trial with palliative end points. J Clin Oncol. 1998: 2272-2279.

Bruera E , Neumann CM , Gagnon B , et al. : Edmonton Regional Palliative Care Program: Impact on patterns of terminal cancer care. CMAJ. 1999; 161(3): 290-293.

Bruera E , Suarez-Almazor M : Cost effectiveness in palliative care. Palliative Medicine. 1998; 12: 315-316.

Hearn J , Higginson IJ : Do specialist palliative care teams improve outcomes for cancer patients? A systemic literature review. Palliative Medicine. 1998; 12: 317-332.

Rutledge R , Osler T : The ICD-9-based illness severity score: A new model that outperforms both DRG and APR-DRG as predictors of survival and resource utilization. Journal of Trauma. 1998; 45: 791-799.

Carter H , MacLeod R , Potter M , Hicks E , Carter J : The development of funding policies for hospices: Is casemix-based funding an option? NZ Med J. 1999; 112: 236-239.

Lee L , Kennedy C , Aitken J : Does the NAIP classification predict length of stay in rehabilitation, geriatrics and palliative care? Aust Health Rev. 1996; 19: 56-74.

Eagar K , Cromwell D , Kennedy C , Lee L : Classifying sub-acute and non-acute patients: Results of the New South Wales casemix area network study. Aust Health Rev. 1997; 20: 26-42.

Goldstein P , Walsh D , Horvitz LU : The Cleveland Clinic Harry R. Horvitz Palliative Care Center. Support Care Cancer. 1996; 4: 329-333.

10.

Walsh D , Gombeski WR , Goldstein P , et al. : Managing a palliative oncology program: The role of a business plan. J Pain Symptom Manage. 1994; 9: 109-117.

11.

Walsh TD : Continuing care in a medical center: The Cleveland Clinic Foundation Palliative Care Service. J Pain Symptom Management. 1990; 5: 273-278.

12.

Tropiano P , Walsh D : Organization of services and nursing care: Hospice and palliative medicine. Seminars in Oncology. 2000; 27: 7-13.

13.

Davis MP , Walsh D , Nelson K , et al. : The business of palliative medicine: Management metrics for an acute-care inpatient unit. American Journal of Hospice & Palliative Care. 2001; 18(1): 26.

14.

Federal Register 63, #147, July 31, 1998 pages, 40953-41131.

15.

Axelsson B , Christensen SB : Evaluation of a hospital-based palliative support service with particular regard to financial outcome measures. Palliative Medicine. 1998; 12: 41-49.

16.

Witteveen PO , van Groenestijn MAC , Blijham GH , Schrijvers APJ : Use of resources and costs of palliative care with parenteral fluids and analgesics in the home setting for patients with end-stage cancer. Ann Oncology. 1999; 10: 161-165.

17.

Lonberger EA , Russell CL , Burton SM : The effects of palliative care on patient charges. JONA. 1997: 27.