ArticleNeurology. Clinical practice2022
Cost and Return on Investment of a Team-Based Palliative Care Program for Parkinson Disease.
Article in Neurology. Clinical practice, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Early thinking palliative care for people with Parkinson's disease: A thematic synthesis based on a systematic mixed-methods review.Journal of Parkinson's disease · 2025Pooled it
- Neurologists and Palliative Care: Are We Doing Enough?Neurology. Clinical practice · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Implementation of palliative care (PC) in neurology settings may improve symptom control and quality of life and reduce acute care admissions. The benefits of team-based PC for patients with Parkinson disease have been established through rigorous evidence standards including randomized controlled trials. However, evidence on implementation costs and return on investment (ROI) is unknown and may guide other providers and systems considering this model of care. We applied time-driven activity-based costing with reimbursable visits calculated using Medicare reimbursement rates in Colorado and current procedural technology codes to 2 outpatient clinics at the University of Colorado Hospital: neurology PC and movement disorders. Per-patient ROI was calculated as the ratio of the incremental difference in financial revenues divided by the incremental difference in investment to expand PC services. The cost per new patient was $154 and $98 for neuropalliative and movement disorders clinics, respectively. Established patient visit costs were $82 and $41 for the neuropalliative care and movement disorders clinics, respectively. The neurology PC clinic had per-patient revenue for new and established visits of $297 and $147, respectively, compared with $203 and $141 for new and established visits, respectively, at the comparator clinic. Based on our assumptions, for every $1 invested in expanding PC services, a projected $1.68 will be recouped by the hospital system for new patient visits, and $0.13 will be recouped for established patient visits. These amounts are context dependent, and a calculator was created to allow other systems to estimate costs and ROI. Our results suggest that in an academic medical setting, both neurology PC and movement disorders clinics provided increased revenue to the health system. Opportunities to improve ROI include efficient allocation of personnel to new and established visits, expanding telemedicine, and other cost offsets for complex patients not estimated in this analysis. ROI may also be greater in health systems that benefit from cost savings such as accountable care organizations. Our approach may be applied to other novel care models. Future research efforts will focus on estimating the continued sustainability of this innovative outpatient care model.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.