Onco@home: comparing the costs and reimbursement of cancer treatment at home with the standard of care

Sarah Misplon,Wim Marneffe,Jana Missiaen,Dries Myny,Inge Decock,Steve Lervant,Koen Vaneygen

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13690-024-01317-1

2024-06-25

Archives of Public Health

Abstract:Oncological home hospitalization (HH) was implemented in a Belgian context to evaluate the feasibility of oncological HH. In a first HH model (HH1), implemented by three Belgian hospitals, two home nursing organizations and a grouping of independent nurses, the blood draw and monitoring prior to intravenous therapy was performed by a trained home nurse at the patient's home the day before the visit to the day hospital. In a second HH model (HH2), implemented in one hospital, the administration of two subcutaneous treatments (Azacitidine and Bortezomib) for myelodysplastic syndrome and multiple myeloma were provided at home instead of in the hospital. A previous study on this pilot showed that oncological HH is feasible and safe and improves the Quality of Life. The aim of this study is to investigate the cost and reimbursement of cancer treatment in these two HH models compared to the Standard of Care (SOC).

public, environmental & occupational health

What problem does this paper attempt to address?

The paper primarily explores the cost and reimbursement issues of implementing Oncological Home Hospitalization (HH) in the context of Belgium and compares it with the Standard of Care (SOC).

### Research Background
- Oncological Home Hospitalization is a model of providing high-quality, patient-centered medical services that can deliver acute inpatient-level care at the patient's home, with limited service time.
- Two HH models were implemented:
1. **HH1**: In collaboration with three hospitals, two home care organizations, and a group of independent nurses, blood sampling and monitoring were performed at the patient's home by trained home nurses the day before the patient received intravenous treatment at the day hospital.
2. **HH2**: In one hospital, two subcutaneous injection drugs (azacitidine and bortezomib) were used for the treatment of myelodysplastic syndromes and multiple myeloma, with these treatments being administered at home rather than in the hospital.

### Research Objectives
- Compare the cost differences between the HH models and SOC.
- Investigate whether the Belgian National Health Insurance (NHI) reimbursement for oncological home hospitalization is sufficient to cover the costs.

### Key Findings
- The costs in both HH1 and HH2 models were higher than SOC. In HH1, although the hospital-side costs decreased (-€23.9), the home care-side costs increased (+€74.3), leading to an overall cost increase (+€50.4).
- In the HH2 model, although the cost increase was smaller (+€9.5 for azacitidine), the extremely low reimbursement for subcutaneous injections in home care (€5 per injection) resulted in overall revenue being insufficient to cover the costs.
- The conclusion shows that the costs of the HH models are higher than SOC, and the current reimbursement mechanism of the Belgian NHI is insufficient to support oncological home hospitalization services, limiting the application of HH in Belgium.

In summary, the study reveals that although HH shows positive effects in improving patients' quality of life, it faces financial challenges. Policymakers need to further consider how to adjust the reimbursement system to support the development of this new care model.