Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
Association between palliative care referral and burden of illness among cancers of the lip, oral cavity and pharynx.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Satheeshkumar Poolakkad S, El-Dallal Mohammed, Raita Y, Mohan Minu P, Adjei Boakye E
Аннотация
PURPOSE: To evaluate the burden of illness--length of stay (LOS), total charges, and discharge disposition--among cancers of the lip, oral cavity and pharynx (CLOP) patients with and without palliative care (PC) referral.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study utilized the 2017 National inpatient sample database to identify hospitalizations with a primary diagnosis of CLOP. Generalized linear models were used to assess the association between PC referral status and the outcomes-LOS, total charges, and discharge disposition while controlling for patients' characteristics.
RESULTS: There were 4165 PC referral among 52, 524 CLOP patients. The geometric mean of LOS for non-PC referral patients was 3.7 days, and for PC referral was 5.02 days, P < 0.001. In the adjusted analysis, CLOP patients with PC referral were more likely to have a higher LOS (Coefficient:1.16; 95% CI, 1.01-1.25) compared to those without PC referral. The geometric mean of total charge among non-PC referral group was 48,308 USD, and CLOP-PC referral was 48,983 USD, P = 0.72. After adjusting for covariates, there was still no significant difference between the PC and non-PC referral groups. Discharge disposition were considerably different across the non-PC vs. PC referral groups. Compared to non-PC referral patients, PC referral patients were more likely to be discharge to skilled nursing facility, intermediate care, and another type of facility (aOR = 7.10; CIs, 5.51-9.12), or home health care (aOR = 4.13; CIs, 3.31-5.15).
CONCLUSION: During primary hospitalization, total charges was not different between patient non-PC and PC referral groups; however, the LOS and discharge dispositions were significantly different.
METHODS: This cross-sectional study utilized the 2017 National inpatient sample database to identify hospitalizations with a primary diagnosis of CLOP. Generalized linear models were used to assess the association between PC referral status and the outcomes-LOS, total charges, and discharge disposition while controlling for patients' characteristics.
RESULTS: There were 4165 PC referral among 52, 524 CLOP patients. The geometric mean of LOS for non-PC referral patients was 3.7 days, and for PC referral was 5.02 days, P < 0.001. In the adjusted analysis, CLOP patients with PC referral were more likely to have a higher LOS (Coefficient:1.16; 95% CI, 1.01-1.25) compared to those without PC referral. The geometric mean of total charge among non-PC referral group was 48,308 USD, and CLOP-PC referral was 48,983 USD, P = 0.72. After adjusting for covariates, there was still no significant difference between the PC and non-PC referral groups. Discharge disposition were considerably different across the non-PC vs. PC referral groups. Compared to non-PC referral patients, PC referral patients were more likely to be discharge to skilled nursing facility, intermediate care, and another type of facility (aOR = 7.10; CIs, 5.51-9.12), or home health care (aOR = 4.13; CIs, 3.31-5.15).
CONCLUSION: During primary hospitalization, total charges was not different between patient non-PC and PC referral groups; however, the LOS and discharge dispositions were significantly different.