Trends in End-of-Life Resource Utilization and Costs among Prostate Cancer Patients from 2006 to 2015: A Nationwide Population-Based Study

• Main Authors: Yun-Sok Ha, So-Young Kim, Jae Il Chung, Hoon Choi, Jae Heon Kim, Ho Song Yu, In-Chang Cho, Hyung Joon Kim, Hyun Chul Chung, Jun Sung Koh, Ji Youl Lee, Dong Jin Park, Hyun Tae Kim, Eun Sang Yoo, Tae Gyun Kwon, Kyungchan Min, Wun-Jae Kim, Seok Joong Yun, Jong-Hyock Park
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Korean Society for Sexual Medicine and Andrology 2021-01-01
• Series: The World Journal of Men's Health
• Subjects: health care costs; healthcare utilization; prostatic neoplasms; terminal care
• ISSN: 2287-4208; 2287-4690

Purpose: The purpose of this study was to evaluate end-of-life resource utilization and costs for prostate cancer patients during the last year of life in Korea. Materials and Methods: The study used the National Health Information Database (NHIS-2017-4-031) of the Korean National Health Insurance Service. Healthcare claim data for the years 2002 through 2015 were collected from the Korean National Health Insurance System. Among 83,173 prostate cancer patients, we enrolled 18,419 after excluding 1,082 who never claimed for the last year of life. Results: From 2006 to 2015, there was a 3.2-fold increase the total number of prostate cancer decedents. The average cost of care during the last year of life increased over the 10-year period, from 14,420,000 Korean won to 20,300,000 Korean won, regardless of survival time. The cost of major treatments and medications, other than analgesics, was relatively high. Radiologic tests, opioids, pain control, and rehabilitation costs were relatively low. Multiple regression analysis identified age and living in rural area as negatively associated with prostate cancer care costs, whereas income level and a higher number of comorbidities were positively associated. Conclusions: Expenditure of prostate cancer care during the last year of life varied according to patient characteristics. Average costs increased every year. However, the results suggest underutilization of support services, likely due to lack of alternative accommodation for terminal prostate cancer patients. Further examination of patterns of utilization of healthcare resources will allow policymakers to take a better approach to reducing the burden of prostate cancer care.