Assessing the impact of transplant case management on clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVES: Case management is commonly used by health plans to attempt to improve the care received by their members who have complex needs, such as those who undergo transplantation. There are few observational studies evaluating the effects that transplant case management programs have on clinical outcomes following a solid organ transplant. This limits the understanding of the quantitative effectiveness of such programs. STUDY DESIGN: This retrospective cohort study of solid organ transplant recipients with access to a transplant case management program used a case-control study design. Propensity score 1:1 matching was used to balance the comparison groups on demographic and pretransplant clinical characteristics. METHODS: Health care claims data were used to determine whether program participation affected clinical outcomes following the transplant. A cohort of 1756 adults 18 years and older (878 cases and 878 controls) who had a solid organ transplant between 2018 and 2020 was followed beginning at the time of referral to transplant until 90 days following the transplant procedure. RESULTS: Transplant recipients who participated in the case management program had significantly lower 30-day and 90-day rejection rates, fewer 90-day readmissions, lower discharge mortality and 90-day mortality, and fewer bed days post transplant compared with those who did not participate in case management. CONCLUSIONS: Patients undergoing a solid organ transplant had improved clinical outcomes when they participated in a specialized case management program sponsored by their health plan.

Blood and Marrow Transplant Clinical Trials Network Study 1102 heralds a new era in hematopoietic cell transplantation in high-risk myelodysplastic syndromes: Challenges and opportunities in implementation.

LAY SUMMARY: People who have advanced myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) may live longer if they get a bone marrow transplant (BMT) instead of other therapies. However, only 15% of people with MDS actually get BMT. Experts say community physicians and transplant physicians should team up with insurance companies and patient advocacy groups to 1) spread this news about lifesaving advances in BMT, 2) ensure that everyone can afford health care, 3) provide emotional support for patients and families, 4) help patients and families get transportation and housing if they need to travel for transplant, and 5) improve care for people of under-represented racial and ethnic backgrounds.

Disseminating Knowledge in Intestinal Failure: Initial Report of the Learn Intestinal Failure Tele-ECHO (LIFT-ECHO) Project.

BACKGROUND: Intestinal failure (IF) is defined as an ultrarare disease, with an estimated prevalence of ∼25,000 cases in the US. There is a suspicion of disparities in outcomes in IF care, likely related to widespread lack of expertise. The Extension for Community Healthcare Outcomes (ECHO) model originally described by Dr Sanjeev Arora has been used to disseminate knowledge and best practices in many chronic diseases to improve outcomes. We examined our initial experience with using the ECHO model to disseminate learning in IF. METHOD: This is a retrospective review of the launch, growth, and geographic reach of the Learn Intestinal Failure TeleECHO (LIFT-ECHO) program using prospectively collected data. RESULTS: The LIFT-ECHO program has achieved significant geographic reach and clinician engagement. The program has reached close to two-thirds of the states in the US and several countries outside. Clinician engagement in the learning program appears to be growing exponentially. CONCLUSION: It is feasible to use the ECHO model to disseminate knowledge in managing a rare disease like IF while maintaining fidelity to the proven model. Studies are underway to demonstrate direct benefit to patients.

Meeting Report: The Dallas Consensus Conference on Liver Transplantation for Alcohol Associated Hepatitis.

Liver transplantation (LT) for alcohol associated hepatitis (AH) remains controversial. We convened a consensus conference to examine various aspects of LT for AH. The goal was not to unequivocally endorse LT for AH; instead, it was to propose recommendations for programs that perform or plan to perform LT for AH. Criteria were established to determine candidacy for LT in the setting of AH and included the following: (1) AH patients presenting for the first time with decompensated liver disease that are nonresponders to medical therapy without severe medical or psychiatric comorbidities; (2) a fixed period of abstinence prior to transplantation is not required; and (3) assessment with a multidisciplinary psychosocial team, including a social worker and an addiction specialist/mental health professional with addiction and transplantation expertise. Supporting factors included lack of repeated unsuccessful attempts at addiction rehabilitation, lack of other substance use/dependency, acceptance of diagnosis/insight with a commitment of the patient/family to sobriety, and formalized agreement to adhere to total alcohol abstinence and counseling. LT should be avoided in AH patients who are likely to spontaneously recover. Short-term and longterm survival comparable to other indications for LT must be achieved. There should not be further disparity in LT either by indication, geography, or other sociodemographic factors. Treatment of alcohol-use disorders should be incorporated into pre- and post-LT care. The restrictive and focused evaluation process described in the initial LT experience for AH worldwide may not endure as this indication gains wider acceptance at more LT programs. Transparency in the selection process is crucial and requires the collection of objective data to assess outcomes and minimize center variation in listing. Oversight of program adherence is important to harmonize listing practices and outcomes.

Patient-centered care coordination in hematopoietic cell transplantation.

Hematopoietic cell transplantation (HCT) is an expensive, resource-intensive, and medically complicated modality for treatment of many hematologic disorders. A well-defined care coordination model through the continuum can help improve health care delivery for this high-cost, high-risk medical technology. In addition to the patients and their families, key stakeholders include not only the transplantation physicians and care teams (including subspecialists), but also hematologists/oncologists in private and academic-affiliated practices. Initial diagnosis and care, education regarding treatment options including HCT, timely referral to the transplantation center, and management of relapse and late medical or psychosocial complications after HCT are areas where the referring hematologists/oncologists play a significant role. Payers and advocacy and community organizations are additional stakeholders in this complex care continuum. In this article, we describe a care coordination framework for patients treated with HCT within the context of coordination issues in care delivery and stakeholders involved. We outline the challenges in implementing such a model and describe a simplified approach at the level of the individual practice or center. This article also highlights ongoing efforts from physicians, medical directors, payer representatives, and patient advocates to help raise awareness of and develop access to adequate tools and resources for the oncology community to deliver well-coordinated care to patients treated with HCT. Lastly, we set the stage for policy changes around appropriate reimbursement to cover all aspects of care coordination and generate successful buy-in from all stakeholders.

A commercial transplant network's perspective of value in solid organ transplantation: Strategizing for value in transplant care.

INTRODUCTION: Solid organ transplantation has been an area of great interest to commercial payers ever since it moved into mainstream medical care beginning in the 1980s. Over the years a system of evaluating transplant program performance based on volume and one year graft and patient survival has developed. While this system has served its purpose, there is an increasing realization from payers that a need exists for a more sophisticated way to evaluate quality and cost-effectiveness of these complex procedures. We report on the perspective of a large transplant network and its efforts to better understand the drivers of value over the entire continuum of care from referral through one year post-transplant. METHODS: We evaluated members of a large commercial health plan who were referred for solid organ transplantation between January 1, 2010 and April 30, 2014. A total of 18,453 cases were evaluated for both clinical and economic outcomes. RESULTS: We report on two areas that can impact value over the entire continuum of care. Large variation in clinical practice and cost was noted. The observed variation was independent of inclusion in the transplant network's preferred network. The average pre-transplant and post-transplant costs for kidney, liver and heart transplantation cases at center level showed a variation of between 18 and 250% of the network's average. Clinical outcomes of median days on the waitlist, waitlist mortality and readmission within thirty days after transplant also showed wide variation. There was similar wide variation in cardiac evaluation of transplant candidates despite the existence of published recommendations. We demonstrated that pre-emptive renal transplantation is a high value strategy for this membership independent of donor source. CONCLUSION: In the studied population the data show wide variation in both clinical and economic parameters related to the transplant process in programs with statistically similar one year patient and graft survival. These results require further examination. In this era of increased concern about delivering value in medical care we may need to reassess how we evaluate organ transplantation programs.

Guidelines for defining and implementing standard episode of care for hematopoietic stem cell transplantation within the context of clinical trials.

The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act requires that health care insurers cover routine patient costs associated with participating in clinical trials for cancer and other life-threatening diseases. There is a need to better define routine costs within the context of hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) clinical trials. This white paper presents guidance on behalf of the American Society for Blood and Marrow Transplantation for defining a standard HSCT episode and delineates components that may be considered as routine patient costs versus research costs. The guidelines will assist investigators, trial sponsors, and transplantation centers in planning for clinical trials that are conducted as a part of the HSCT episode and will inform payers who provide coverage for transplantation.