Search

A recent report from the Institute of Medicine titled Delivering High-Quality Cancer Care: Charting a New Course for a System in Crisis, identifies improvement in information technology (IT) as essential to improving the quality of cancer care in America. The report calls for implementation of a learning healthcare IT system: a system that supports patient-clinician interactions by providing patients and clinicians with the information and tools necessary to make well informed medical decisions and to support quality measurement and improvement. While some elements needed for a learning healthcare system are already in place for cancer, they are incompletely implemented, have functional deficiencies, and are not integrated in a way that creates a true learning healthcare system. To achieve the goal of a learning cancer care delivery system, clinicians, professional organizations, government, and the IT industry will have to partner, develop, and incentivize participation.

Responding to growing concerns regarding the safety, quality, and efficacy of cancer care in the United States, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) of the National Academy of Sciences commissioned a comprehensive review of cancer care delivery in the US health care system in the late 1990s. The National Cancer Policy Board (NCPB), a 20-member board with broad representation, performed this review. In its review, the NCPB focused on the state of cancer care delivery at that time, its shortcomings, and ways to measure and improve the quality of cancer care. The NCPB described an ideal cancer care system in which patients would have equitable access to coordinated, guideline-based care and novel therapies throughout the course of their disease. In 1999, the IOM published the results of this review in its influential report, Ensuring Quality Cancer Care. The report outlined 10 recommendations, which, when implemented, would: 1) improve the quality of cancer care, 2) increase the current understanding of quality cancer care, and 3) reduce or eliminate access barriers to quality cancer care. Despite the fervor generated by this report, there are lingering doubts regarding the safety and quality of cancer care in the United States today. Increased awareness of medical errors and barriers to quality care, coupled with escalating health care costs, has prompted national efforts to reform the health care system. These efforts by health care providers and policymakers should bridge the gap between the ideal state described in Ensuring Quality Cancer Care and the current state of cancer care in the United States. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Accurate measurement of healthcare costs is required to assess and improve the value of oncology care., Objectives: We aimed to determine the cost of breast cancer care provision across collaborating health care organizations., Methods: We used time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) to calculate the complete cost of breast cancer care-initial treatment planning, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, surgical resection and reconstruction, and ancillary services (e.g., psychosocial oncology, physical therapy)-across multiple hospital sites. Data were collected between December 2019 and February 2020. TDABC steps involved (1) developing process maps for care delivery pathways; (2) determine capacity cost rates for staff, medical equipment, and hospital space; (3) measure the time required for each process step, both manually through clinic observation and using data from the Real-Time Location System (RTLS); and (4) calculate the total cost of care delivery., Results: Surgical care costs ranged from $1431 for a lumpectomy to $12,129 for a mastectomy with prepectoral implant reconstruction. Radiation therapy was costed at $1224 for initial simulation and patient education, and $200 for each additional treatment. Base costs for chemotherapy delivery were $382 per visit, with additional costs driven by chemotherapy agent(s) administered. Personnel expenses were the greatest contributor to the cost of surgical care, except in mastectomy with implant reconstruction, where device costs equated to up to 60% of the cost of surgery., Conclusion: The cost of complete breast cancer care depended on (1) treatment protocols; (2) patient choice of reconstruction; and (3) the need for ancillary services (e.g., physical therapy). Understanding the actual costs and cost drivers of breast cancer care delivery may better inform resource utilization to lower the cost and improve the quality of care., (© 2021. Society of Surgical Oncology.)

Introduction: Integrated quality improvement (QI) and cost reduction strategies can help increase value in cancer care. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) is a bottom-up costing tool that measures resource use over the full care cycle. We applied standard QI and TDABC methods to improve workflow efficiency and reduce costs for MRI-guided prostate brachytherapy., Methods and Materials: We constructed process maps of the baseline prostate brachytherapy workflow from initial consultation through one year after treatment. Process maps reflected resources and time required at each step. TDABC costs were calculated by multiplying each process time by the cost per min of the resource(s) used at that step. We then used plan-do-study-act methodology to identify workflow inefficiencies and implement solutions to reduce resource consumption., Results: The highest cost components at baseline were the operating room (OR) (40%), imaging (8.7%), and consultation (7.6%). Higher-than-expected costs (3%) were incurred during surgery scheduling. After targeted QI initiatives, OR time was reduced from 90 to 70 min, which reduced overall cost by 5%. Personnel task downshifting reduced costs by 10% at consultation and 77% at surgery scheduling. Re-engineering of follow-up protocols reduced costs by 8.4%. Costs under the new workflow decreased by 18.2%., Conclusions: TDABC complements traditional QI initiatives by quantifying the highest cost steps and focusing QI initiatives to reduce costs and improve efficiency. As payment reform evolves toward bundled payments, TDABC and QI initiatives will help providers understand, communicate, and improve the value of cancer care., (Copyright © 2021. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: To characterize full cycle of care costs for managing an acute ureteral stone using time-driven activity-based costing., Methods: We defined all phases of care for patients presenting with an acute ureteral stone and built an overarching process map. Maps for sub-processes were constructed through interviews with providers and direct observation of clinical spaces. This facilitated calculation of cost per minute for all aspects of care delivery, which were multiplied by associated process times. These were added to consumable costs to determine cost for each specific step and later aggregated to determine total cost for each sub-process. We compared costs of eight common clinical pathways for acute stone management, defining total cycle of care cost as the sum of all sub-processes that comprised each pathway., Results: Cost per sub-process included $920 for emergency department (ED) care, $1665 for operative stent placement, $2368 for percutaneous nephrostomy tube placement, $106 for urology clinic consultation, $238 for preoperative center visit, $4057 for ureteroscopy with laser lithotripsy (URS), $2923 for extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy, $169 for clinic stent removal, $197 for abdominal x-ray, and $166 for ultrasound. The lowest cost pathway ($1388) was for medical expulsive therapy, whereas the most expensive pathway ($8002) entailed a repeat ED visit prompting temporizing stent placement and interval URS., Conclusion: We found a high degree of cost variation between care pathways common to management of acute ureteral stone episodes. Reliable cost accounting data and an understanding of variability in clinical pathway costs can inform value-based care redesign as payors move away from pure fee-for-service reimbursement., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: In value-based health care delivery, radiation oncologists need to compare empiric costs of care delivery with advanced technologies, such as intensity-modulated proton therapy (IMPT) and intensity-modulated radiation therapy (IMRT). We used time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) to compare the costs of delivering IMPT and IMRT in a case-matched pilot study of patients with newly diagnosed oropharyngeal (OPC) cancer., Materials and Methods: We used clinicopathologic factors to match 25 patients with OPC who received IMPT in 2011-12 with 25 patients with OPC treated with IMRT in 2000-09. Process maps were created for each multidisciplinary clinical activity (including chemotherapy and ancillary services) from initial consultation through 1 month of follow-up. Resource costs and times were determined for each activity. Each patient-specific activity was linked with a process map and TDABC over the full cycle of care. All calculated costs were normalized to the lowest-cost IMRT patient., Results: TDABC costs for IMRT were 1.00 to 3.33 times that of the lowest-cost IMRT patient (mean ± SD: 1.65 ± 0.56), while costs for IMPT were 1.88 to 4.32 times that of the lowest-cost IMRT patient (2.58 ± 0.39) ( P  < .05). Although single-fraction costs were 2.79 times higher for IMPT than for IMRT (owing to higher equipment costs), average full cycle cost of IMPT was 1.53 times higher than IMRT, suggesting that the initial cost increase is partly mitigated by reductions in costs for other, non-RT supportive health care services., Conclusions: In this matched sample, although IMPT was on average more costly than IMRT primarily owing to higher equipment costs, a subset of IMRT patients had similar costs to IMPT patients, owing to greater use of supportive care resources. Multidimensional patient outcomes and TDABC provide vital methodology for defining the value of radiation therapy modalities., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: Steven J. Frank, MD, is an Associate Editor of the International Journal of Particle Therapy. Dr Frank reports personal fees from Varian, grants and personal fees from C4 Imaging, grants from Eli Lilly, grants from Elekta, grants and personal fees from Hitachi, other from Breakthrough Chronic Care, personal fees from Augmenix, personal fees from National Comprehensive Cancer Center (NCCN), outside the submitted work. C. David Fuller, MD, PhD, received/receives funding and salary support unrelated to this project during the period of study execution from The National Institutes of Health (NIH) National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering (NIBIB) Research Education Programs for Residents and Clinical Fellows Grant (R25EB025787-01); the National Institute for Dental and Craniofacial Research Establishing Outcome Measures Award (1R01DE025248/R56DE025248) and Academic Industrial Partnership Grant (R01DE028290); NCI Early Phase Clinical Trials in Imaging and Image-Guided Interventions Program (1R01CA218148); an NIH/NCI Cancer Center Support Grant (CCSG) Pilot Research Program Award from the UT MD Anderson CCSG Radiation Oncology and Cancer Imaging Program (P30CA016672); an NIH/NCI Head and Neck Specialized Programs of Research Excellence (SPORE) Developmental Research Program Award (P50 CA097007); NIH Big Data to Knowledge (BD2K) Program of the National Cancer Institute (NCI) Early Stage Development of Technologies in Biomedical Computing, Informatics, and Big Data Science Award (1R01CA2148250; National Science Foundation (NSF), Division of Mathematical Sciences, Joint NIH/NSF Initiative on Quantitative Approaches to Biomedical Big Data (QuBBD) Grant (NSF 1557679); NSF Division of Civil, Mechanical, and Manufacturing Innovation (CMMI) Grant (NSF 1933369); and the Sabin Family Foundation. Direct infrastructure support is provided to Dr Fuller by the multidisciplinary Stiefel Oropharyngeal Research Fund of the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center Charles and Daneen Stiefel Center for Head and Neck Cancer and the Cancer Center Support Grant (P30CA016672) and the MD Anderson Program in Image-guided Cancer Therapy. Dr Fuller has received direct industry grant support, honoraria, and travel funding from Elekta AB unrelated to this project. Simona F. Shaitelman, MD, reports grants from Varian, during the conduct of the study. Nikhil G. Thaker, MD, reports consulting fees from McKesson Specialty Health, unrelated to this study. Robert S. Kaplan, PhD, serves as a member of the Board of Advisers for Avant-garde Health and reports occasional speaking fees on value-based health care from Medtronic., (©Copyright 2021 The Author(s).)

Background: There remains no tool to quantify the total value of comparative processes in health care. Hospital administrative data sets are emerging as valuable sources to evaluate performance. Thus, we use a framework to simultaneously assess multiple domains of value associated with an enhanced recovery initiative using national administrative data., Materials and Methods: Risk-stratified clinical pathways for patients undergoing pancreatic surgery were implemented in 2016 at our institution. We used a national administrative database to characterize changes in value associated with this initiative. Value metrics assessed included in-hospital mortality, complication rates, length of stay (LOS), 30-day readmission rates, and institutional costs. We compared our performance with other hospitals both before and after implementation of the pathways. Metrics were graphed on radar charts to assess overall value., Results: 22,660 cases were assessed. Comparing 75 cases at our institution and 5520 cases at all other hospitals before pathway implementation, mean in-hospital LOS was 9.6 versus 10.8 d, in-hospital mortality was 0.0% versus 1.9%, mean costs were $23,585 versus $21,387, 30-day readmission rates were 1.3% versus 7.4%, and complication rates were 8.0% versus 11.2%, respectively. Comparing 334 cases at our institution and 16,731 cases at all other hospitals after pathway implementation, mean in-hospital LOS was 7.7 versus 10.3 d, in-hospital mortality was 0.3% versus 1.6%, mean costs were $19,428 versus $22,032, 30-day readmission rates were 6.6% versus 7.5%, and complication rates were 6.3% versus 10.3%, respectively. Notably, LOS and institutional costs were reduced at our institution after implementation of the enhanced clinical care pathways. Our costs were higher than comparators before implementation, but lower than comparators after implementation., Conclusions: Herein, we used an analytic framework and used national administrative data to assess the value of an enhanced care initiative as benchmarked with data from other hospitals. We thus illustrate how to identify and measure opportunities for targeted improvements in health care delivery. We also recognize the limitations of the use of administrative data in a comprehensive assessment of value in health care., (Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Context: In response to growing concerns over rising costs and major variation in quality, improving value for patients has been proposed as a fundamentally new strategy for how healthcare should be delivered, measured, and remunerated., Objective: To systematically review the literature regarding the implementation and impact of value-based healthcare in urology., Evidence Acquisition: A systematic review was performed to identify studies that described the implementation of one or more elements of value-based healthcare in urologic settings and in which the associated change in healthcare value had been measured. Twenty-two publications were selected for inclusion., Evidence Synthesis: Reorganization of urologic care around medical conditions was associated with increased use of guidelines-compliant care for men with prostate cancer, and improved outcomes for patients with lower urinary tract symptoms. Measuring outcomes for every patient was associated with improved prostate cancer outcomes, while the measurement of costs using time-driven activity-based costing was associated with reduced resource utilization in a pediatric multidisciplinary clinic. Centralization of urologic cancer care in the UK, Denmark, and Canada was associated with overall improved outcomes, although systems integration in the USA yielded mixed results among urologic cancer patients. No studies have yet examined bundled payments for episodes of care, expanding the geographic reach for centers of excellence, or building enabling information technology platforms., Conclusions: Few studies have critically assessed the actual or simulated implementation of value-based healthcare in urology, but the available literature suggests promising early results. In order to effectively redesign care, there is a need for further research to both evaluate the potential results of proposed value-based healthcare interventions and measure their effects where already implemented., Patient Summary: While few studies have evaluated the implementation of value-based healthcare in urology, the available literature suggests promising early results., (Copyright © 2020 European Association of Urology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: Patients undergoing radical cystectomy represent a particularly resource-intensive patient population. Time-driven activity based costing (TDABC) assigns time to events and then costs are based on the people involved in providing care for specific events. To determine the major cost drivers of radical cystectomy care we used a TDABC analysis for the cystectomy care pathway., Subjects and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed a random sample of 100 patients out of 717 eligible patients undergoing open radical cystectomy and ileal conduit for bladder cancer at our institution between 2012 and 2015. We defined the cycle of care as beginning at the preoperative clinic visit and ending with the 90-day postoperative clinic visit. TDABC was carried out with construction of detailed process maps. Capacity cost rates were calculated and the care cycle was divided into 3 phases: surgical, inpatient, and readmissions. Costs were normalized to the lowest cost driver within the cohort., Results: The mean length of stay was 6.9 days. Total inpatient care was the main driver of cost for radical cystectomy making up 32% of the total costs. Inpatient costs were mainly driven by inpatient staff care (76%). Readmissions were responsible for 29% of costs. Surgery was 31% of the costs, with the majority derived from operating room staff costs (65%)., Conclusion: The major driver of cost in a radical cystectomy pathway is the inpatient stay, closely followed by operating room costs. Surgical costs, inpatient care and readmissions all remain significant sources of expense for cystectomy and efforts to reduce cystectomy costs should be focused in these areas., (Copyright © 2020. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Competing Interests: The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Problem: Value-based health care (VBHC) is an innovative framework for redesigning care delivery to achieve better outcomes for patients and reduce cost; however, providing students with the skills to understand and engage with these topics is a challenge to medical educators., Approach: Here, the authors present a novel, VBHC curriculum integrated into a required course for post-core clerkship students-launched in 2018 at Harvard Medical School and taught in conjunction with Harvard Business School faculty-that highlights key principles of VBHC most relevant to undergraduate medical education. The course integrates VBHC with related health disciplines, including health policy, ethics, epidemiology, and social medicine, using a case-based method. Students practice active decision making while learning key concepts to address value in clinical practice., Outcomes: Since the course's inception in March 2018, 95 students (87%) completed the standardized course evaluation; the majority said VBHC content and pedagogical style (i.e., case-based learning) enhanced their learning. Students' critiques focused on too little integration with other disciplines (e.g., social medicine, ethics), the physical space, and inadequate time for debates about potential tensions between VBHC and other course disciplines., Next Steps: The authors believe that by exposing medical students to the principles of VBHC, students will fulfill the expectations of graduating physicians by excelling as critical thinkers, collaborative team members, and judicious care providers throughout their residency, clinical practice, and beyond. Future VBHC curricula expansions may include elective coursework, intensive seminar series, and formal dual degrees.

A shift in healthcare payment models from volume toward value-based incentives will require deliberate input into systems development from both perioperative clinicians and administrators to ensure appropriate recognition of the value of all services provided-particularly ones that are not reimbursable in current fee-for-service payment models. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) methodology identifies cost drivers and reduces inaccurate costing based on siloed budgets. Inaccurate costing also results from the fact that current costing methods use charges and there has been tremendous cost shifting throughout health care. High cost, high variability processes can be identified for process improvement. As payment models inevitably evolve towards value-based metrics, it will be critical to knowledgably participate in the coordination of these changes. This document provides 8 practical Recommendations from the Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement (SPAQI) aimed at outlining the principles of TDABC, creating process maps for patient workflows, understanding payment structures, establishing physician alignment across service lines to create integrated practice units to facilitate development of evidence-based pathways for specific patient risk groups, establishing consistent care delivery, minimizing variability between physicians and departments, utilizing data analytics and information technology tools to track progress and obtain actionable data, and using TDABC to create costing transparency.

Executive Summary: Pain control for patients undergoing thoracic surgery is essential for their comfort and for improving their ability to function after surgery, but it can significantly increase costs. Here, we demonstrate how time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) can be used to assess personnel costs and create process-improvement strategies.We used TDABC to evaluate the cost of providing pain control to patients undergoing thoracic surgery and to estimate the impact of specific process improvements on cost. Retrospective healthcare utilization data, with a focus on personnel costs, were used to assess cost across the entire cycle of acute pain medicine delivery for these patients. TDABC was used to identify possible improvements in personnel allocation, workflow changes, and epidural placement location and to model the cost savings of those improvements.We found that the cost of placing epidurals in the preoperative holding room was less than that of placing epidurals in the operating room. Personnel reallocation and workflow changes resulted in mean cost reductions of 14% with epidurals in the holding room and 7% cost reductions with epidurals in the operating room. Most cost savings were due to redeploying anesthesiologists to duties that are more appropriate and reducing their unnecessary duties by 30%. Furthermore, the change in epidural placement location alone in 80% of cases reduced costs by 18%. These changes did not compromise quality of care.TDABC can model personnel costs and process improvements in delivering specific healthcare services and justify further investigation of process improvements.

Purpose: Despite growing interest in bundled payments to reduce the costs of care, this payment method remains largely untested in cancer. This 3-year pilot tested the feasibility of a 1-year bundled payment for the multidisciplinary treatment of head and neck cancers., Methods: Four prospective treatment-based bundles were developed for patients with selected head and neck cancers. These risk-adjusted bundles covered 1 year of care that began with primary cancer treatment. Manual processes were developed for patient identification, enrollment, billing, and payment. Patients were prospectively identified and enrolled, and bundled payments were made at treatment start. Operational metrics tracked incremental effort for pilot processes and average payment cycle time compared with fee-for-service (FFS) payments., Results: This pilot confirmed the feasibility of a 1-year prospective bundled payment for head and neck cancers. Between November 2014 and October 2016, 88 patients were enrolled successfully with prospective bundled payments. Through September 2017, 94% of patients completed the pilot with 6% still enrolled. Manual pilot processes required more effort than anticipated; claims processing was the most time-consuming activity. The production of a bundle bill took an additional 15 minutes versus FFS billing. The average payment cycle time was 37 days (range, 15 to 141 days) compared with a 15-day average under FFS., Conclusion: Prospective bundled payments were successfully implemented in this pilot. Additional pilots should study this payment method in higher-volume cancers. Robust systems are needed to automate patient identification, enrollment, billing, and payment along with policies that reduce administrative burden and allow for the introduction of novel cancer therapies.

Purpose: The transformation from volume to value will require communication of outcomes and costs of therapies; however, outcomes are usually nonstandardized, and cost of therapy differs among stakeholders. We developed a standardized value framework by using radar charts to visualize and communicate a wide range of patient outcomes and cost for three forms of prostate cancer treatment., Materials and Methods: We retrospectively reviewed data from men with low-risk prostate cancer who were treated with low-dose rate brachytherapy (LDR-BT), proton beam therapy, or robotic-assisted prostatectomy. Patient-reported outcomes comprised the Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite-50 domains for sexual function, urinary incontinence and/or bother, bowel bother, and vitality 12 months after treatment. Costs were measured by time-driven activity-based costing for the first 12 months of the care cycle. Outcome and cost data were plotted on a single radar chart for each treatment modality., Results: Outcome and cost data from patients who were treated with robotic-assisted prostatectomy (n = 381), proton beam therapy (n = 165), and LDR-BT (n = 238) were incorporated into the radar chart. LDR-BT seemed to deliver the highest overall value of the three treatment modalities; however, incorporation of patient preferences regarding outcomes may allow other modalities to be considered high-value treatment options., Conclusion: Standardization and visualization of outcome and cost metrics may allow more comprehensive and collaborative discussions about the value of health care services. Communicating the value framework by using radar charts may be an effective method to present total value and the value of all outcomes and costs in a manner that is accessible to all stakeholders. Variations in plotting of costs and outcomes will require future focus group initiatives., (Copyright © 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

Background: With the movement towards bundled payments, stakeholders should know the true cost of the care they deliver. Time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) can be used to estimate costs for each episode of care. In this analysis, TDABC is used to both estimate the costs of anesthesia care and identify the primary drivers of those costs of 11 common oncologic outpatient surgical procedures., Methods: Personnel cost were calculated by determining the hourly cost of each provider and the associated process time of the 11 surgical procedures. Using the anesthesia record, drugs, supplies and equipment costs were identified and calculated. The current staffing model was used to determine baseline personnel costs for each procedure. Using the costs identified through TDABC analysis, the effect of different staffing ratios on anesthesia costs could be predicted., Results: Costs for each of the procedures were determined. Process time and costs are linearly related. Personnel represented 79% of overall cost while drugs, supplies and equipment represented the remaining 21%. Changing staffing ratios shows potential savings between 13% and 28% across the 11 procedures., Conclusions: TDABC can be used to estimate the costs of anesthesia care. This costing information is critical to assessing the anesthesiology component in a bundled payment. It can also be used to identify areas of cost savings and model costs of anesthesia care. CRNA to anesthesiologist staffing ratios profoundly influence the cost of care. This methodology could be applied to other medical specialties to help determine costs in the setting of bundled payments., Competing Interests: The article “Bundled Payments: Measuring the Costs of Anesthesia Care in an Outpatient Oncology Surgery Center Using Time-Driven Activity-Based Costing” is authored by Katy French, Alexis Guzman, Augustin Rubio, John Frenzel and Thomas Feeley and submitted to Healthcare as an original article. Below all authors have disclosed relevant commercial associations that might pose a conflict of interest, (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: Value in healthcare-i.e., patient-centered outcomes achieved per healthcare dollar spent-can define quality and unify performance improvement goals with health outcomes of importance to patients across the entire cycle of care. We describe the process through which value-based measures for breast cancer patients and dynamic capture of these metrics via our new electronic health record (EHR) were developed at our institution., Methods: Contemporary breast cancer literature on treatment options, expected outcomes, and potential complications was extensively reviewed. Patient perspective was obtained via focus groups. Multidisciplinary physician teams met to inform a 3-phase process of (1) concept development, (2) measure specification, and (3) implementation via EHR integration., Results: Outcomes were divided into 3 tiers that reflect the entire cycle of care: (1) health status achieved, (2) process of recovery, and (3) sustainability of health. Within these tiers, 22 patient-centered outcomes were defined with inclusion/exclusion criteria and specifications for reporting. Patient data sources will include the Epic Systems EHR and validated patient-reported outcome questionnaires administered via our institution's patient portal., Conclusions: As healthcare costs continue to rise in the United States and around the world, a value-based approach with explicit, transparently reported patient outcomes will not only create opportunities for performance improvement but will also enable benchmarking across providers, healthcare systems, and even countries. Similar value-based breast cancer care frameworks are also being pursued internationally.

Purpose: Value, defined as outcomes over costs, has been proposed as a measure to evaluate prostate cancer (PCa) treatments. We analyzed standardized outcomes and time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) for prostate brachytherapy (PBT) to define a value framework., Methods and Materials: Patients with low-risk PCa treated with low-dose-rate PBT between 1998 and 2009 were included. Outcomes were recorded according to the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement standard set, which includes acute toxicity, patient-reported outcomes, and recurrence and survival outcomes. Patient-level costs to 1 year after PBT were collected using TDABC. Process mapping and radar chart analyses were conducted to visualize this value framework., Results: A total of 238 men were eligible for analysis. Median age was 64 (range, 46-81). Median followup was 5 years (0.5-12.1). There were no acute Grade 3-5 complications. Expanded Prostate Cancer Index Composite 50 scores were favorable, with no clinically significant changes from baseline to last followup at 48 months for urinary incontinence/bother, bowel bother, sexual function, and vitality. Ten-year outcomes were favorable, including biochemical failure-free survival of 84.1%, metastasis-free survival 99.6%, PCa-specific survival 100%, and overall survival 88.6%. TDABC analysis demonstrated low resource utilization for PBT, with 41% and 10% of costs occurring in the operating room and with the MRI scan, respectively. The radar chart allowed direct visualization of outcomes and costs., Conclusions: We successfully created a visual framework to define the value of PBT using the International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement standard set and TDABC costs. PBT is associated with excellent outcomes and low costs. Widespread adoption of this methodology will enable value comparisons across providers, institutions, and treatment modalities., (Copyright © 2016 American Brachytherapy Society. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Purpose: The definition of medical necessity and indications for coverage of proton beam therapy (PBT) for the treatment of cancer can vary greatly among different professional societies (PSs) and payors. Variations in policies introduce substantial inefficiencies and limit access for patients who may clinically benefit from PBT. The purpose of this study was to analyze differences in medical necessity and coverage policies among payors and a PS., Materials and Methods: Peer-reviewed references and coverage decisions were abstracted from the coverage policies of each of the major payors in the state of Texas (Aetna-TX, UnitedHealthcare-TX, Blue Cross Blue Shield-TX) as well as from a representative PS, the Particle Therapy Cooperative Group. Differences in number and quality of references as well as coverage decisions were analyzed with descriptive statistics., Results: Proton beam therapy coverage in the state of Texas varied among payors and the PS for several disease sites, including the central nervous system, eyes, and prostate. The PS cited more references and higher levels of evidence than payor policies ( P  < .01). Levels of evidence were inconsistent between policies. Interestingly, only 18% to 29% of cited references overlapped between policies., Conclusions: Payors and PSs have independent and nonstandardized processes for determining PBT coverage, which result in variations in both coverage and evidence cited. These differences can lead to clinical inefficiencies and may reduce access to PBT based on payor status rather than clinical utility. A collaborative approach among all stakeholders would help create a more consistent, equitable, and patient-centered PBT policy that could identify areas for further evidence development., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: The authors have no conflicts of interest to disclose., (© Copyright 2016 International Journal of Particle Therapy.)

Purpose: To meet increasing demand for cancer genetic testing and improve value-based cancer care delivery, National Cancer Centre Singapore restructured the Cancer Genetics Service in 2014. Care delivery processes were redesigned. We sought to improve access by increasing the clinic capacity of the Cancer Genetics Service by 100% within 1 year without increasing direct personnel costs., Methods: Process mapping and plan-do-study-act (PDSA) cycles were used in a quality improvement project for the Cancer Genetics Service clinic. The impact of interventions was evaluated by tracking the weekly number of patient consultations and access times for appointments between April 2014 and May 2015. The cost impact of implemented process changes was calculated using the time-driven activity-based costing method., Results: Our study completed two PDSA cycles. An important outcome was achieved after the first cycle: The inclusion of a genetic counselor increased clinic capacity by 350%. The number of patients seen per week increased from two in April 2014 (range, zero to four patients) to seven in November 2014 (range, four to 10 patients). Our second PDSA cycle showed that manual preappointment reminder calls reduced the variation in the nonattendance rate and contributed to a further increase in patients seen per week to 10 in May 2015 (range, seven to 13 patients). There was a concomitant decrease in costs of the patient care cycle by 18% after both PDSA cycles., Conclusion: This study shows how quality improvement methods can be combined with time-driven activity-based costing to increase value. In this paper, we demonstrate how we improved access while reducing costs of care delivery., (Copyright © 2016 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

As healthcare providers cope with pricing pressures and increased accountability for performance, they should be rededicating themselves to improving the value they deliver to their patients: better outcomes and lower costs. Time-driven activity-based costing offers the potential for clinicians to redesign their care processes toward that end. This costing approach, however, is new to healthcare and has not yet been systematically implemented and evaluated. This article describes early time-driven activity-based costing work at several leading healthcare organizations in the United States and Europe. It identifies the opportunities they found to improve value for patients and demonstrates how this costing method can serve as the foundation for new bundled payment reimbursement approaches.

Purpose: We have a crisis in health care delivery, originating from increasing health care costs and inconsistent quality-of-care measures. During the past several years, value-based health care delivery has gained increasing attention as an approach to control costs and improve quality. One proven way to control costs and improve the quality of health care is subspecialty pathologic review of patients with cancer before initiation of therapy. Our study examined the diagnostic error rate among patients with cancer treated at a tertiary care hospital and demonstrated the value of subspecialty pathologic review before initiation of treatment., Methods: From September 1 to September 30, 2011, all patients seeking a clinical consultation had pathology submitted to and reviewed by a pathologist with subspecialty expertise and correlated in our pathology database., Results: A total of 2,718 patient cases were reviewed during September 2011. There was agreement between the original pathologist and our departmental subspecialty pathologist in 75% of cases. In 25% of cases, there was a discrepancy between the original pathology report and the subspecialty final pathology report; 509 changes in diagnosis were minor discrepancies (18.7%), and in 6.2% of patients (169 reports), the change in diagnosis represented a major discrepancy that potentially affected patient care., Conclusion: Second review of a patient's outside pathology by a subspecialist pathologist demonstrates the value of multidisciplinary cancer care in a high-volume comprehensive cancer center. The second review improves clinical outcomes by providing patients with evidence-based treatment plans for their precise pathologic diagnoses., (Copyright © 2014 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.)

In 1999, the Institute of Medicine (IOM) published Ensuring Quality Cancer Care , an influential report that described an ideal cancer care system and issued ten recommendations to address pervasive gaps in the understanding and delivery of quality cancer care. Despite generating much fervor, the report's recommendations-including two recommendations related to quality measurement-remain largely unfulfilled. Amidst continuing concerns regarding increasing costs and questionable quality of care, the IOM charged a new committee with revisiting the 1999 report and with reassessing national cancer care, with a focus on the aging US population. The committee identified high-quality patient-clinician relationships and interactions as central drivers of quality and attributed existing quality gaps, in part, to the nation's inability to measure and improve cancer care delivery in a systematic way. In 2013, the committee published its findings in Delivering High-Quality Cancer Care: Charting a New Course for a System in Crisis , which included two recommendations that emphasize coordinated, patient-centered quality measurement and information technology enhancements: Develop a national quality reporting program for cancer care as part of a learning health care system; and,Develop an ethically sound learning health care information technology system for cancer that enables real-time analysis of data from cancer patients in a variety of care settings. These recommendations underscore the need for independent national oversight, public-private collaboration, and substantial funding to create robust, patient-centered quality measurement and learning enterprises to improve the quality, accessibility, and affordability of cancer care in America.

Background: The health care industry, including consumers, providers, and payers of health care, recognize the importance of developing meaningful, patient-centered measures. This article describes our experience using an existing electronic medical record largely based on free text formats without structured documentation, in conjunction with tumor registry abstraction techniques, to obtain and analyze data for use in clinical improvement and public reporting., Methods: We performed a retrospective analysis of 2467 previously untreated patients treated with curative intent who presented with laryngeal, pharyngeal, or oral cavity cancer in order to develop a system to monitor and report meaningful outcome metrics of head and neck cancer treatment. Patients treated between 1995 and 2006 were analyzed for the primary outcomes of survival at 1 and 2 years, the ability to speak at 1 year posttreatment, and the ability to swallow at 1 year posttreatment., Results: We encountered significant limitations in clinical documentation because of the lack of standardization of meaningful measures, as well limitations with data abstraction using a retrospective approach to reporting measures. Almost 5000 person-hours were required for data abstraction, quality review, and reporting, at a cost of approximately $134,000. Our multidisciplinary teams document extensive patient information; however, data is not stored in easily accessible formats for measurement, comparison, and reporting., Conclusion: We recommend identifying measures meaningful to patients, providers, and payers to be documented throughout the patients' entire treatment cycle, and significant investment in the improvements to electronic medical records and tumor registry reporting in order to provide meaningful quality measures for the future., (Copyright © 2013 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.)

Background: The value and impact of process improvement initiatives are difficult to quantify. We describe the use of time-driven activity-based costing (TDABC) in a clinical setting to quantify the value of process improvements in terms of cost, time and personnel resources., Problem: Difficulty in identifying and measuring the cost savings of process improvement initiatives in a Preoperative Assessment Center (PAC)., Goals: Use TDABC to measure the value of process improvement initiatives that reduce the costs of performing a preoperative assessment while maintaining the quality of the assessment., Strategy: Apply the principles of TDABC in a PAC to measure the value, from baseline, of two phases of performance improvement initiatives and determine the impact of each implementation in terms of cost, time and efficiency., Results: Through two rounds of performance improvements, we quantified an overall reduction in time spent by patient and personnel of 33% that resulted in a 46% reduction in the costs of providing care in the center. The performance improvements resulted in a 17% decrease in the total number of full time equivalents (FTE's) needed to staff the center and a 19% increase in the numbers of patients assessed in the center. Quality of care, as assessed by the rate of cancellations on the day of surgery, was not adversely impacted by the process improvements., (© 2013 Published by Elsevier Inc.)

The global burden of cancer is increasing. By 2020, the global cancer burden is expected to rise by 50% owing to the increasingly elderly population. The delivery of cancer care is likely to increase the need for perioperative physicians for both operative procedures and pain management, offering new professional challenges. Specifically, these challenges will include volume and financial management, as well coordination of cancer treatment and pain management. Coordinated, team-based cancer care will be essential to ensure value-based care. Short and long-term outcome measurement is an integral part of the process., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.)

Background: The World Health Organization recognizes depression as one of the most burdensome diseases in the world. Among cancer patients, depression is significantly associated with shorter survival, independent of the influence of biomedical prognostic factors. Although cancer is the third leading cause of morbidity and mortality among Filipinos, little is known about depressive symptoms and their influence on health-related quality of life in this population. We assessed the prevalence of, and factors associated with, depressive symptoms and their influence on health-related quality of life in Filipino patients with cancer., Methods: The Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ)-8 and the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 were administered to all inpatients and outpatients, age >=18 years presenting for cancer treatment., Results: Twenty-two percent (n=53/247) were categorized as depressed, using a PHQ-8 cutoff of ≥10. Depressed patients scored lower on cognitive, emotional, role, physical, and social functioning than those who scored PHQ<10 (all P<0.001). Depression varied by disease status, performance status and marital status (all P<0.001). However, only performance status (OR [odds ratio]=2.20; 95% CI=1.60, 3.00) and disease status (OR=2.4; 95% CI=1.13, 5.22) were significantly associated with depression in the multivariable model., Conclusions: Depression is prevalent in Filipino cancer patients. The findings provide empirical support for the development of mental health services in this understudied population. This study, the first to assess the prevalence of and factors associated with depression in Filipino cancer patients, needs further validation.

Objective: The authors compared thoracic epidural with ON-Q infiltrating catheters in patients having open thoracotomy to determine whether one method better relieves postoperative pain and would allow earlier discharge from the hospital and, hence, cost savings., Design: Retrospective chart review., Setting: University hospital., Participants: Fifty adult patients (24 to 81 years old) undergoing open thoracotomy by one surgeon., Interventions: One group had thoracic epidural catheters placed by an anesthesiologist and then managed by the acute pain service. The other group had intraoperative ON-Q (ON-Q; I-Flow; Lake Forest, California) infiltrating catheters placed by the surgeon, wound infiltration with a local anesthetic, plus patient-controlled analgesia with an intravenous opioid., Measurements and Main Results: The authors measured and compared average daily pain rating, maximum pain rating, time to discharge from the hospital, and total bill for hospital stay. Patients who received epidural analgesia had lower average pain scores on day 2 than did patients in the ON-Q group. Patients in the ON-Q group reported higher maximum pain scores on days 1 and 2 and at the time of discharge. Patients in the ON-Q group were discharged an average of 1 day earlier; hence, their average total bill was lower., Conclusions: Even though the maximum pain score was higher in the ON-Q group, patients were comfortable enough to be discharged earlier, resulting in cost savings. ON-Q infiltrating catheters present a good option for providing postoperative analgesia to patients having an open thoracotomy., (Copyright © 2013 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

In March 2010, President Obama signed into law the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act and the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act. This legislation attempts to address cost control and improve the quality of healthcare in the United States. Cancer is a major health problem in the United States and the leading cause of death for Americans under the age of 80. Therefore, cancer care providers need to be fully engaged in ongoing discussions regarding quality measurement and care delivery. With the optimum level of collaboration and support, the proposals in the legislation can be properly structured to deliver improved access to care via better delivery systems, as well as more appropriate reimbursement to advance the prevention and treatment of cancer., (Copyright © 2010 American Cancer Society.)

Historically, quality measures for cancer have followed a different route than overall quality measures in the health care system. Many specialized cancer treatment centers were exempt from standard reporting on quality measures because of the complexity of cancer. Additionally, it has been difficult to create meaningful quality measures for cancer because the disease can strike so many different organs; is discovered at and progresses through different stages; and is treated using different modalities, such as surgery, radiation, and chemotherapy. Over the past decade the National Quality Forum, a nonprofit organization dedicated to bettering the quality of US health care, has endorsed measures of quality for cancer providers and patients. The Affordable Care Act of 2010, which has sections specific to cancer reporting, will also further the development and public reporting of cancer quality measures-important steps in improving the delivery of cancer care.

Value-based healthcare delivery is being discussed in a variety of healthcare forums. This concept is of great importance in the reform of the US healthcare delivery system. Defining and applying the principles of value-based competition in healthcare delivery models will permit future evaluation of various delivery applications. However, there are relatively few examples of how to apply these principles to an existing care delivery system. In this article, we describe an approach for assessing the value created when treating cancer patients in a multidisciplinary care setting within a comprehensive cancer center. We describe the analysis of a multidisciplinary care center that treats head and neck cancers, and we attempt to examine how this center integrates with Porter and Teisberg's (2006) concept of value-based competition based on the results analysis. Using the relationship between outcomes and costs as the definition of value, we developed a methodology to analyze proposed outcomes for a population of patients treated using a multidisciplinary approach, and we matched those outcomes to the costs of the care provided. We present this work as a model for defining value for a subset of patients undergoing active treatment. The method can be applied not only to head and neck treatments, but to other modalities as well. Public reporting of this type of data for a variety of conditions can lead to improved competition in the healthcare marketplace and, as a result, improve outcomes and decrease health expenditures.

Intensive care unit (ICU) resources are frequently utilized in the supportive care of hospitalized patients with cancer. Patients with cancer reportedly have poor outcomes from cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR). The goal of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness and patient care costs of CPR applied to patients already receiving life support in an ICU. The medical records of patients who developed cardiac arrest and underwent CPR in the ICU of a comprehensive cancer center between 1993 and 2000 were reviewed. ICU charges after the first episode of CPR were analyzed. There were 5,196 admissions to the ICU during this time; 406 (8%) of the patients underwent CPR; 67% had hematologic malignancies or had undergone hematopoietic stem cell transplantation: 256 patients (63%) died at the time of the arrest, and in 150 (37%) spontaneous circulation was restored. There were 104 patients (26%) who survived more than 24 hours but ultimately died during their hospitalization; their mean time to death was 4.3 days (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.9-5.6), and mean ICU charges were $45,877 (95% CI $24,802-$66,952). Seven patients (2%) survived to be discharged. Patients who survived after CPR and were discharged from the hospital were those who had acute ventricular dysrhythmias and were resuscitated promptly. The application of CPR to cancer patients receiving life support is costly and typically does not lead to long-term survival. Cancer patients requiring admission to an ICU should receive full supportive care short of resuscitation. Providing assurances that care will remain appropriate, aggressive, and in accordance with the patient's and family's wishes can optimize compassionate care while avoiding futile life-sustaining interventions.

Background: Despite advances in cardiopulmonary resuscitation and the education of its providers, survival remains dismal for cancer patients suffering in-hospital cardiac arrest. In an effort to determine if characteristics of cardiac arrest would represent a useful parameter for prognostication and recommendations regarding the suitability of ongoing resuscitation for various groups, this review was undertaken for patients who experienced in-hospital cardiac arrest., Methods: A retrospective study of data gathered between January 1993 and December 1997 was undertaken in a 518-bed comprehensive cancer center. The records of 243 inpatients who experienced cardiac arrest and received cardiopulmonary resuscitation were reviewed, and their course observed until hospital discharge or death., Results: Sixteen of 73 patients (22%) who had sudden, unanticipated cardiac arrests survived to be discharged from the hospital; however, none (0 of 171) of the patients who experienced an anticipated cardiac arrest survived (P < 0.001). Logistic regression analysis revealed that anticipated cardiac arrest associated with metabolic derangement was an independent predictor of hospital mortality., Conclusions: Patients experiencing an anticipated cardiac arrest, the course of which could not be interrupted through aggressive management in an intensive care unit, have an extremely poor prognosis. Ongoing resuscitative measures in these patients need not be routinely provided. The authors suggest an algorithm for resuscitation that evaluates the characteristics of the arrest as a prognostic factor. This algorithm should be implemented once progressive deterioration spirals toward cardiac arrest that cannot be prevented. Such an approach should avoid painful and costly interventions that are futile with the present techniques of cardiopulmonary resuscitation., (Copyright 2001 American Cancer Society.)

Improving the prediction of successful ventilator weaning and extubation is a goal that all Intensivists and perioperative physicians strive for. The successful wean and extubation of ventilated patients decreases hospital length of stay and associated costs, but more importantly it also reduces patient morbidity and mortality. This review evaluates traditional and novel indices used in the assessment for ventilatory wean readiness. Novel equipment such as the Bicore pulmonary monitor and the CO2 SMO Plus are now available on the market to assess and monitor ventilator weaning and may offer some value in this process. We also review the non-respiratory factors affecting weaning and the role of the bedside nurse and respiratory therapist. Resolution of the pulmonary compromise and an understanding of respiratory physiology, used in conjunction with monitored indices of weaning parameters in a consistent fashion will continue to improve our success rates of ventilator weaning and extubation.

Electrocardiography was the first application of electronic monitoring to anesthesia care. The detection of arrhythmias remains the most important use of this technology today. Several predisposing factors tend to emerge when perioperative arrhythmias are evaluated. These are the anesthetic given, the site of surgery, abnormalities of blood gases or electrolytes, tracheal intubation, reflexes such as vagal slowing and the oculocardiac reflex, stimulation of the central nervous system, the presence of preexisting heart disease, and the use of intracardiac devices. In the evaluation of cardiac arrhythmias, several facts need to be determined. The most important is to determine if there is an underlying complication of anesthesia and surgery that may explain the arrhythmia. In addition, it is vital to evaluate the heart rate, the regularity, the number of P waves per QRS, and the configuration of the QRS. The anesthesiologist needs to determine whether the rhythm is dangerous to the patient and whether it requires treatment. Prompt evaluation and management of perioperative arrhythmias reduce anesthetic morbidity and mortality. This article reviews the causes and pharmacological treatment of major abnormalities of atrial and ventricular cardiac arrhythmias occurring in the perioperative period.