Evidence map›Paper›PMID 21384139›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2012

Home care--a safe and attractive alternative to inpatient administration of intensive chemotherapies.

François Lüthi, Nadia Fucina, Nathalie Divorne, Brigitte Santos-Eggimann, Christine Currat-Zweifel, Patricia Rollier, Jean-Blaise Wasserfallen, Nicolas Ketterer, Serge Leyvraz

Abstract readEvaluation Study
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 18 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
18citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

18 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Impacts on health outcomes and on resources utilization for anticancer drugs injection at home, a complex intervention: a systematic review.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2021
    Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Parenteral medication use in hospital at home: Challenges and opportunities.American journal of health-system pharmacy : AJHP : official journal of the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists · 2024
    Article
  6. Onco@home: comparing the costs and reimbursement of cancer treatment at home with the standard of care.Archives of public health = Archives belges de sante publique · 2024
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Comparison of chemotherapy treatment administration via venous port and peripheral vascular access in terms of quality of life and costs.Quality of life research : an international journal of quality of life aspects of treatment, care and rehabilitation · 2023
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Observational
  13. Observational
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Cost savings of home bortezomib injection in patients with multiple myeloma treated by a combination care in Outpatient Hospital and Hospital care at Home.Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2016
    Article
  18. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors.

François LüthiCentre Pluridisciplinaire d'Oncologie, University Hospital-CHUV, BH06 Rue du Bugnon 46, 1011 Lausanne, Switzerland.
Nadia Fucina
Nathalie Divorne
Brigitte Santos-Eggimann
Christine Currat-Zweifel
Patricia Rollier
Jean-Blaise Wasserfallen
Nicolas Ketterer
Serge Leyvraz

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectiveThe objective of this study was to evaluate feasibility, safety, perception, and costs of home care for the administration of intensive chemotherapies.

methodsPatients receiving sequential chemotherapy in an inpatient setting, living within 30 km of the hospital, and having a relative to care for them were offered home care treatment. Chemotherapy was administered by a portable, programmable pump via an implantable catheter. The main endpoints were safety, patient's quality of life [Functional Living Index-Cancer (FLIC)], satisfaction of patients and relatives, and costs.

resultsTwo hundred days of home care were analysed, representing a total of 46 treatment cycles of intensive chemotherapy in 17 patients. Two cycles were complicated by technical problems that required hospitalisation for a total of 5 days. Three major medical complications (heart failure, angina pectoris, and major allergic reaction) could be managed at home. Grades 1 and 2 nausea and vomiting occurring in 36% of patients could be treated at home. FLIC scores remained constant throughout the study. All patients rated home care as very satisfactory or satisfactory. Patient benefits of home care included increased comfort and freedom. Relatives acknowledged better tolerance and less asthenia of the patient. Home care resulted in a 53% cost benefit compared to hospital treatment (€420 ± 120/day vs. €896 ± 165/day).

conclusionAdministration of intensive chemotherapy regimens at home was feasible and safe. Quality of life was not affected; satisfaction of patients and relatives was very high. A psychosocial benefit was observed for patients and relatives. Furthermore, a cost-benefit of home care compared to hospital treatment was demonstrated.

Indexed as

Patient SatisfactionQuality of LifeAdultAgedAntineoplastic Combined Chemotherapy ProtocolsCost-Benefit AnalysisFeasibility StudiesFemaleHome Care ServicesHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPopulation SurveillanceSurveys and QuestionnairesSwitzerland

Identifiers

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.