Do complementary and integrative medicine therapies reduce healthcare utilization among oncology patients? A systematic review of the literature and recommendations

PURPOSE

Complementary and integrative medicine (CIM) is frequently used by oncology teams for reducing physical and emotional side-effects related to cancer treatment. In light of the changing healthcare system, evidence is needed regarding the economic implications of these interventions. The purpose of this study was to: (1) systematically examine the literature for links between CIM interventions and healthcare utilization (2) provide recommendations for growing this area of research.

METHOD

PubMed and EBSCO databases were reviewed for articles reporting on healthcare utilization associated with CIM therapy use in oncology populations. CIM intervention characteristics and healthcare utilization were extracted and summarized from 7 articles meeting inclusion criteria.

RESULTS

Studies included various CIM modalities. Most studies targeted physical symptoms (i.e., pain, infection, nausea/vomiting; n = 4). Healthcare utilization included medication use/cost (n = 4) and hospitalization length/cost (n = 5). All four studies (prospective/retrospective between-group, n = 2; within-subject pre-post, n = 1; RCT, n = 1) examining medication reduction noted decreased medication costs or use. Mixed findings emerged for studies examining hospitalizations (retrospective between-group, n = 2; within-subject pre-post, n = 1; RCT, n = 2), with only one study (retrospective between-group) indicating lower hospitalization duration in the CIM group.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings indicate the potential for CIM therapy to reduce healthcare utilization in oncology populations, particularly medication use. However, this research is limited both in size and quality. To increase the uptake of these interventions and to advocate for insurance coverage of CIM interventions, high quality economic evaluations are needed.

Spending on Hospital Care and Pediatric Psychology Service Use Among Adolescents and Young Adults With Cancer

Objective

To examine the relationship between need-based pediatric psychology service use and spending on hospital care among adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with cancer.

Methods

Billing data were obtained from 48 AYAs with cancer receiving need-based pediatric psychology services and a comparison cohort of 48 AYAs with cancer not receiving services. A factorial analysis of covariance examined group differences in spending for hospital care. Pending significant findings, a multivariate analysis of covariance was planned to examine the relationship between need-based pediatric psychology service use and spending for inpatient admissions, emergency department (ED) visits, and outpatient visits.

Results

Spending for hospital care was higher among AYAs receiving need-based pediatric psychology services than in the comparison cohort (p < .001, ωPartial2 = .11). Group differences were driven by significantly higher spending for inpatient admissions and ED visits among AYAs receiving need-based pediatric psychology services.

Conclusions

The behavioral and psychosocial difficulties warranting need-based pediatric psychology services may predict higher health care spending.