SYSTEMATIC LITERATURE REVIEW TO IDENTIFY THE CURRENT STATE OF KNOWLEDGE REGARDING HOME INFUSION VS MEDICAL-SETTING INFUSION

Author(s)

Myers J1, Eibling A2, King J2, Smolen H1
1Medical Decision Modeling Inc., Indianapolis, IN, USA, 2Enable Injections, Inc., Cincinnati, OH, USA

OBJECTIVES : To provide a broad, evidenced-based overview of the peer-reviewed published literature on clinical, cost, and humanistic benefits of non-institutional therapeutic infusion

METHODS : Searches were conducted in PubMed, EMBASE, and MEDLINE in-Process in June 2019 to identify studies evaluating home infusion versus medical-setting infusion evaluating the following outcomes: costs and health-care resource use; efficacy and safety; patient-centered quality of life; and patient preference, real-world outcomes. Two investigators independently screened all studies identified, according to the inclusion and exclusion criteria.

RESULTS : 878 unique articles were identified. Sixty-three were accepted for inclusion in the review. Most studies (19) were conducted in the US. Other studies were conducted in the UK (8), Canada (6), Australia (6), and Italy (6), among others. Nineteen evaluated patients with cancer. Thirty-seven of the included studies reported economic and/or health care resource use of patients receiving infusions at home vs in a hospital or clinic setting. All studies consistently reported a decrease in costs associated with home infusion treatment over in-hospital or in-clinic treatment. Twenty of the included studies evaluated clinical outcomes associated with in-home infusions vs hospital or clinic treatment. All studies reported improved or similar treatment outcomes with in-home treatment compared to hospital/clinic treatment across multiple disease states. Patient preference studies indicated that the majority of patients preferred home-based treatment.

CONCLUSIONS : Studies reporting economic outcomes consistently found a decrease in costs associated with home treatment vs hospital or clinic treatment. These studies were published as early as 1981 up to 2018. The cost savings were identified from both a health care payer perspective and a patient/societal perspective. All studies which reported clinical outcomes reported improved or similar treatment efficacy and safety with in-home treatment compared to hospital/clinic treatment across multiple disease states. Additionally, patient preference studies indicated that the majority of patients preferred home-based treatment to hospital/clinic-based.

Conference/Value in Health Info

2020-05, ISPOR 2020, Orlando, FL, USA

Value in Health, Volume 23, Issue 5, S1 (May 2020)

Code

PMD19

Topic

Clinical Outcomes, Economic Evaluation, Medical Technologies, Patient-Centered Research

Topic Subcategory

Comparative Effectiveness or Efficacy, Cost-comparison, Effectiveness, Utility, Benefit Analysis, Medical Devices, Patient-reported Outcomes & Quality of Life Outcomes

Disease

Musculoskeletal Disorders

Your browser is out-of-date

ISPOR recommends that you update your browser for more security, speed and the best experience on ispor.org. Update my browser now

×