TY - JOUR
T1 - Cancer care in the United States
T2 - Identifying end-of-life cohorts
AU - Berke, Ethan M.
AU - Smith, Tenbroeck
AU - Song, Yunjie
AU - Halpern, Michael T.
AU - Goodman, David C.
PY - 2009/2/1
Y1 - 2009/2/1
N2 - Objectives: End-of-life care is increasingly recognized as an important part of cancer management for many patients. Current methods to measure end-of-life care are limited by difficulties in identifying cancer cohorts with administrative data. We examined several techniques of identifying end-of-life cancer cohorts with claims data that is population-based, geographically scalable, and amenable to routine updating. Methods: Using Medicare claims for patients 65 years of age and older, four techniques for identifying end-of-life cancer cohorts were compared; one based on Part A data using a broad primary or narrow secondary diagnosis of cancer, two based on Part B data, and one combining the Part A and B methods. We tested the performance of each definition to ascertain an appropriate end-of-life cancer population. Results: The combined Part A and B definition using a primary or secondary diagnosis of cancer within a window of 180 days prior to death appears to be the most accurate and inclusive in ascertaining an end-of-life cohort (78.7% attainment). Conclusion: Combining inpatient and outpatient claims data, and identifying cases based upon a broad primary or a narrow secondary cancer definition is the most accurate and inclusive in ascertaining an end-of-life cohort.
AB - Objectives: End-of-life care is increasingly recognized as an important part of cancer management for many patients. Current methods to measure end-of-life care are limited by difficulties in identifying cancer cohorts with administrative data. We examined several techniques of identifying end-of-life cancer cohorts with claims data that is population-based, geographically scalable, and amenable to routine updating. Methods: Using Medicare claims for patients 65 years of age and older, four techniques for identifying end-of-life cancer cohorts were compared; one based on Part A data using a broad primary or narrow secondary diagnosis of cancer, two based on Part B data, and one combining the Part A and B methods. We tested the performance of each definition to ascertain an appropriate end-of-life cancer population. Results: The combined Part A and B definition using a primary or secondary diagnosis of cancer within a window of 180 days prior to death appears to be the most accurate and inclusive in ascertaining an end-of-life cohort (78.7% attainment). Conclusion: Combining inpatient and outpatient claims data, and identifying cases based upon a broad primary or a narrow secondary cancer definition is the most accurate and inclusive in ascertaining an end-of-life cohort.
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=60049094393&partnerID=8YFLogxK
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=60049094393&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1089/jpm.2008.0239
DO - 10.1089/jpm.2008.0239
M3 - Article
C2 - 19207055
AN - SCOPUS:60049094393
SN - 1096-6218
VL - 12
SP - 128
EP - 132
JO - Journal of Palliative Medicine
JF - Journal of Palliative Medicine
IS - 2
ER -