Search Results

You are looking at 1 - 3 of 3 items for

  • Author: Nathan J. Moore x
  • Refine by Access: All x
Clear All Modify Search
Full access

Nathan J. Moore, Megan Othus, Anna B. Halpern, Nicholas P. Howard, Linyi Tang, Kyle E. Bastys, Mary-Elizabeth M. Percival, Paul C. Hendrie, Garrett A. Hartley, Verna L. Welch, Elihu H. Estey, and Roland B. Walter

Background: Early hospital discharge (EHD) after intensive acute myeloid leukemia (AML) induction chemotherapy has become routine at the University of Washington/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance over the past several years. We assessed the financial implications of EHD over the first 4 years after its broad adoption for patients with AML and other high-grade myeloid neoplasms undergoing AML-like induction chemotherapy. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively compared charges between 189 patients with EHD who received all postinduction inpatient/outpatient care within our care system between August 2014 and July 2018 and 139 medically matched control patients who remained hospitalized for logistical reasons. Charges from the day of initial discharge (patients with EHD) or end of chemotherapy (control patients) until blood count recovery, additional chemotherapy or care transition, hospital discharge (for control patients only), an elapse of 42 days, or death were extracted from financial databases and separated into categories: facility/provider, emergency department, transfusions, laboratory, imaging, pharmacy, and miscellaneous. Results: Combined charges averaged $4,157/day (range, $905–$13,119/day) for patients with EHD versus $9,248/day (range, $4,363–$48,522/day) for control patients (P<.001). The EHD cohort had lower mean facility/provider, transfusion, laboratory, and pharmacy charges but not imaging or miscellaneous charges. During readmissions, there was no statistically significant difference in daily inpatient charges between the EHD and control cohorts. After multivariable adjustment, average charges were $3,837/day lower for patients with EHD (P<.001). Conclusions: Together with previous data from our center showing that EHD is safe and associated with reduced healthcare resource utilization, this study further supports this care approach for AML and other high-grade myeloid neoplasms if infrastructure is available to enable close outpatient follow-up.

Full access

Nathan J. Moore, Megan Othus, Anna B. Halpern, Nicholas P. Howard, Linyi Tang, Kyle E. Bastys, Mary-Elizabeth M. Percival, Paul C. Hendrie, Garrett A. Hartley, Verna L. Welch, Elihu H. Estey, and Roland B. Walter

Background: Early hospital discharge (EHD) after intensive acute myeloid leukemia (AML) induction chemotherapy has become routine at the University of Washington/Seattle Cancer Care Alliance over the past several years. We assessed the financial implications of EHD over the first 4 years after its broad adoption for patients with AML and other high-grade myeloid neoplasms undergoing AML-like induction chemotherapy. Patients and Methods: We retrospectively compared charges between 189 patients with EHD who received all postinduction inpatient/outpatient care within our care system between August 2014 and July 2018 and 139 medically matched control patients who remained hospitalized for logistical reasons. Charges from the day of initial discharge (patients with EHD) or end of chemotherapy (control patients) until blood count recovery, additional chemotherapy or care transition, hospital discharge (for control patients only), an elapse of 42 days, or death were extracted from financial databases and separated into categories: facility/provider, emergency department, transfusions, laboratory, imaging, pharmacy, and miscellaneous. Results: Combined charges averaged $4,157/day (range, $905–$13,119/day) for patients with EHD versus $9,248/day (range, $4,363–$48,522/day) for control patients (P<.001). The EHD cohort had lower mean facility/provider, transfusion, laboratory, and pharmacy charges but not imaging or miscellaneous charges. During readmissions, there was no statistically significant difference in daily inpatient charges between the EHD and control cohorts. After multivariable adjustment, average charges were $3,837/day lower for patients with EHD (P<.001). Conclusions: Together with previous data from our center showing that EHD is safe and associated with reduced healthcare resource utilization, this study further supports this care approach for AML and other high-grade myeloid neoplasms if infrastructure is available to enable close outpatient follow-up.

Full access

NCCN Guidelines® Insights: Survivorship, Version 1.2022

Featured Updates to the NCCN Guidelines

Tara Sanft, Andrew Day, Lindsay Peterson, M. Alma Rodriguez, Shannon Ansbaugh, Saro Armenian, K. Scott Baker, Tarah Ballinger, Gregory Broderick, Wendy Demark-Wahnefried, Kristin Dickinson, Nathan Paul Fairman, Debra L. Friedman, Mindy Goldman, Norah Lynn Henry, Christine Hill-Kayser, Melissa Hudson, Nazanin Khakpour, Divya Koura, Allison L. McDonough, Michelle Melisko, Kathi Mooney, Halle C.F. Moore, Natalie Moryl, Heather Neuman, Tracey O’Connor, Linda Overholser, Electra D. Paskett, Chirayu Patel, William Pirl, Andrea Porpiglia, Kathryn J. Ruddy, Lidia Schapira, Lillie Shockney, Sophia Smith, Karen L. Syrjala, Amye Tevaarwerk, Eric H. Yang, Phyllis Zee, Nicole R. McMillian, and Deborah A. Freedman-Cass

The NCCN Guidelines for Survivorship are intended to help healthcare professionals who work with survivors to ensure that the survivors’ complex and varied needs are addressed. The NCCN Guidelines provide screening, evaluation, and treatment recommendations for the consequences of adult-onset cancer and its treatment; recommendations to help promote physical activity, weight management, and immunizations in survivors; and a framework for care coordination. This article summarizes updates to the NCCN Guidelines pertaining to preventive health for cancer survivors, including recommendations about alcohol consumption and vaccinations.