A palliative care approach for adult non-cancer patients with life-limiting illnesses is cost-saving or cost-neutral: a systematic review of RCTs

• Published in: BMC palliative care 2024-08, Vol.23 (1), p.200-12, Article 200
• Main Authors: Janke, Katharina, Salifu, Yakubu, Gavini, Siva, Preston, Nancy, Gadoud, Amy
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Adult; Analysis; Cancer; Chronic illnesses; Clinical trials; Cost control; Cost Savings - methods; Cost Savings - statistics & numerical data; Cost-Benefit Analysis - methods; Decision making; Economic aspects; Emergency medical care; End-of-life care; Health care costs; Health care expenditures; Health care policy; Hospital costs; Humans; Life-limiting illness; Medical care, Cost of; Medical diagnosis; Methods; Palliative care; Palliative Care - economics; Palliative Care - methods; Palliative Care - standards; Palliative treatment; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic; Systematic review
• ISSN: 1472-684X; 1472-684X
• DOI: 10.1186/s12904-024-01516-1

Patients living with life-limiting illnesses other than cancer constitute the majority of patients in need of palliative care globally, yet most previous systematic reviews of the cost impact of palliative care have not exclusively focused on this population. Reviews that tangentially looked at non-cancer patients found inconclusive evidence. Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) are the gold standard for treatment efficacy, while total health care costs offer a comprehensive measure of resource use. In the sole review of RCTs for non-cancer patients, palliative care reduced hospitalisations and emergency department visits but its effect on total health care costs was not assessed. The aim of this study is to review RCTs to determine the difference in costs between a palliative care approach and usual care in adult non-cancer patients with a life-limiting illness. A systematic review using a narrative synthesis approach. The protocol was registered with PROSPERO prospectively (no. CRD42020191082). Eight databases were searched: Medline, CINAHL, EconLit, EMBASE, TRIP database, NHS Evidence, Cochrane Library, and Web of Science from inception to January 2023. Inclusion criteria were: English or German; randomised controlled trials (RCTs); adult non-cancer patients (> 18 years); palliative care provision; a comparator group of standard or usual care. Quality of studies was assessed using Drummond's checklist for assessing economic evaluations. Seven RCTs were included and examined the following diseases: neurological (3), heart failure (2), AIDS (1) and mixed (1). The majority (6/7) were home-based interventions. All studies were either cost-saving (3/7) or cost-neutral (4/7); and four had improved outcomes for patients or carers and three no change in outcomes. In a non-cancer population, this is the first systematic review of RCTs that has demonstrated a palliative care approach is cost-saving or at least cost-neutral. Cost savings are achieved without worsening outcomes for patients and carers. These findings lend support to calls to increase palliative care provision globally.