Costs of Home Versus Inpatient Treatment for Fever and Neutropenia: Analysis of a Multicenter Randomized Trial
Conduit aux Etats-Unis, cet essai randomisé multicentrique analyse et compare les coûts relatifs au traitement de la neutropénie fébrile chez des patients atteints de cancer, que ceux-ci soient traités à leur domicile ou en hôpital
Purpose For patients with cancer who have febrile neutropenia, relative costs of home versus hospital treatment, including unreimbursed costs borne by patients and families, are poorly characterized. We estimated costs from a randomized trial of patients with low-risk febrile neutropenia for whom outpatient care was feasible, comparing inpatient treatment with discharge to home care after inpatient observation.Methods We collected direct medical and self-reported indirect costs for 57 inpatient and 35 outpatient treatment episodes of patients enrolled in a randomized trial from 1996 through 2000. Charges from hospital bills were converted to costs using Medicare cost-to-charge ratios. Patients kept daily logs of out-of-pocket payments and time spent by informal caregivers providing care. Dollar amounts were standardized to June 2008.Results Mean total charges for the hospital arm were 49% higher than for the home treatment arm ($16,341 v $10,977; P < .01). Mean estimated total costs for the hospital arm were 30% higher ($10,143 v $7,830; P < .01). Inspection of sparse available data suggests that payments made were similar by treatment arm. Inpatients and their caregivers spent more out of pocket than their outpatient counterparts (mean, $201 v $74; P < .01). Informal caregivers for both treatment arms reported similar time caring and lost from work.Conclusion Home intravenous antibiotic treatment was less costly than continued inpatient care for carefully selected patients with cancer having febrile neutropenia without significantly increased indirect costs or caregiver burden.
Journal of Clinical Oncology , résumé, 2011