ASH Clinical News ACN_5.6_Full_Issue_Digital | Page 51

FEATURE while patients in the autologous group spent 52 per- cent of their days at home. Febrile neutropenia was the main reason for returning to the clinic. The researchers found that, overall, patients treated at home had low rates of infectious complica- tions, with only four patients developing bloodstream infections. Patients reported high quality of life with home- based HCT, Dr. Sung added. “They were so happy to be at home and they felt greater freedom,” he said. “They were able to eat better, exercise better, and they just felt better overall.” Dr. Sung also reported that the at-home HCT model was well received by physicians and caregiv- ers. “Although outpatient transplant has a lot of benefits for the patient, it puts a lot of strain on the caregiver, like having to get patients out of bed and dressed and to the clinic on time for their appoint- ments,” Dr. Sung said. “At-home transplant will have great effects on the caregivers, as well as the patients.” Based on the success of the phase I study, the researchers are now conducting a National Cancer Institute–funded randomized, phase II trial com- paring home care versus standard care. The study, which focuses on patients undergoing allogeneic HCT, aims to demonstrate that staying in their usual environment preserves patients’ gut microbiomes and reduces the incidence of graft-versus-host disease. Although there may be higher upfront costs to the program, Dr. Sung believes that shorten- ing hospital stays and preventing complications will have tremendous cost savings for health-care systems. Hospice at Home Palliative-care specialists have long advocated for earlier integration of palliative services in patients’ care plans, and surveys have revealed that most patients would prefer dying at home. Still, most patients with hematologic disorders never make it to hospice care and often die in the hospital. As Adam J. Olszewski, MD, and colleagues found in a review of hospice use among Medicare beneficiaries with leukemia, dependence on red blood cell transfusions is a substantial barrier to ac- cessing palliative or end-of-life services. 9 Fewer than half (47%) of transfusion-dependent patients were enrolled in hospice before death, and often just for a few days. Home-based models could augment palliative services for transfusion-dependent patients as they reach the end of life. Rather than entering a clinic to receive these services, they could be treated at home. “Many hospices won’t do transfusion support from a practical standpoint, because they can’t handle the cost or the logistics,” said Thomas LeBlanc, MD, an associate professor of Medicine at Duke University School of Medicine and co-author on the study. “They don’t have a way, for example, to get blood to the person’s home or they don’t feel they could safely do that.” Now, to bring more hematology patients the end-of-life care they need, researchers are exploring the possibility of offering transfusions at home as part of hospice care. Jennifer Holter-Chakrabarty, MD, an associate professor of medicine at the Stephenson Cancer Center at the University of Oklahoma and a member of the ASH Committee on Government Affairs, is ASHClinicalNews.org participating in a pilot project studying the effects of at-home transfusion services on patients’ quality of life and clinical outcomes. The study will include 20 patients, half of whom will receive palliative care as they normally would (with transfusions in a center according to standard hospice guidelines) and half of whom will receive home-based transfusions (either on a weekly sched- ule, or on an as-needed basis to manage symptoms). “If we can prove that home-based transfusions can be done in this setting, I bet we will see a huge difference in patients’ quality of life,” Dr. Holter- Chakrabarty said. She also believes this home-based model may increase the overall number of hematol- ogy patients who are able to benefit from hospice services. “[At-home care for sickle cell disease] can be done, but ... not everybody will fit the perfect profile of a patient who would get IV medication at home.” —IFEYINWA OSUNKWO, MD, MPH The researchers also will need to allay clinicians’ concerns about safety of at-home transfusions: Transfusion-related reactions can be severe and, with- out the continual support available in the clinic, these complications could be problematic for patients. “I think that the fears about this being a seri- ous issue are probably overstated,” Dr. LeBlanc said. “Several groups, mostly out of Europe, have published results showing that they have implemented home- based transfusion programs without any significant problems like that.” For example, in a 2018 study published in Transfusion, clinicians operating a Hospital at Home program in Spain that provided home transfusions found that, over three decades of existence, the rate of adverse events was just 2.68 percent. 10 The rate “decreased significantly with time,” the authors reported, adding that at-home transfusion was performed “on selected patients by dedicated Hospital at Home units with well-trained staff, un- der specific protocols.” Taking the Long Way Home Shifting services to the home setting has improved patients’ quality of life and reduced overall health- care costs in the management of many diseases, but the researchers who spoke with ASH Clinical News acknowledged that it won’t be feasible in all settings or conditions. In SCD, for example, opioids have been pre- scribed to help patients manage painful episodes without requiring those patients to come to the hospital. But, in response to the growing opioid epidemic in the U.S., physicians have become more conservative with opioid prescribing. According to Dr. Osunkwo, health-care organizations also are moving away from providing IV pain medicines at home, given the concerns about the suitability of the home environment, accessibility, complica- tions, and staffing. Providing at-home treatment may also discourage patients from taking personal responsibility for their care. If patients can receive IV fluids at home, Dr. Osunkwo said, they might be less motivated to drink fluids on their own. “It can be done, but I think you have to realize that not everybody will fit the perfect profile of a patient who would get IV medication at home,” she said. The decision to provide at-home treatment requires a close evaluation of patients’ eligibility for the intervention, psychosocial makeup, and level of family or caregiver support. To solve the issues around accessibility, many at-home programs rely on telemedicine. It’s often an effective means of bringing patient and doc- tor together, regardless of the miles between them. The challenge, however, lies in getting paid for these services. “Insurance companies will pay for telemedicine services if there is a lack of specialists in a patient’s county,” Dr. Osunkwo explained. However, she noted, “if you think about it, there may be hematol- ogists within a rural county, but no specialists with SCD expertise.” Proving the need for specialized SCD care (and reimbursement for that care) remains a challenge. At-home programs are positioned to help solve many problems associated with inpatient hospitaliza- tions – improving access to care, improving quality of life, lowering infection risk – but the model has its problems. Clinicians have expressed concerns about maintaining continuity of care or treatment adherence if a home-based program doesn’t include sufficient monitoring and follow-up. Health-care systems may be able to save money on resources, but transitioning to a home-based model also could make organizations more vulner- able to malpractice claims or delay reimbursement for services. “There is a lot that we can do at home, but what- ever we do, it needs to be safe,” Dr. Leff concluded. —By Jill Sederstrom ● REFERENCES 1. Forbes. “Explaining the Fall (And Possible Rebirth) Of Doctors’ House Calls.” Accessed April 3, 2019, from https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2015/12/09/ explaining-the-decline-fall-and-possible-rebirth-of-doctors-house-calls/amp/. 2. Gillick MR, Serrell NA, Gillick LS. Adverse consequences of hospitalization in the elderly. Soc Sci Med. 1982;16:1033-8. 3. Johns Hopkins Medicine. Hospital At Home. Accessed April 3, 2019, from https:// www.johnshopkinssolutions.com/solution/hospital-at-home/. 4. Boston Business Journal. “Boston startup Medically Home wants to bring the hos- pital to you.” Accessed April 4, 2019, from https://www.bizjournals.com/boston/ news/2018/07/09/boston-startup-medically-home-wants-to-bring-the.html. 5. The Commonwealth Fund. “Hospital at Home Programs Improve Outcomes, Lower Costs But Face Resistance From Providers and Payers.” Accessed April 3, 2019, from https://www.commonwealthfund.org/publications/newsletter-article/ hospital-home-programs-improve-outcomes-lower-costs-face-resistance. 6. Othieno R, Okpo E, Forster R. Home versus in-patient treatment for deep vein blood clots. Cochrane Sys Rev. 2018;1:CD003076. 7. Mamtani M, Conlon L. Can we safely discharge low-risk patients with febrile neutro- penia from the emergency department? Ann Emerg Med. 2014;63:48-51. 8. Sung AD, Nichols KR, Messina JA, et al. Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation at home. Abstract #745. Presented at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting, December 7, 2017; Atlanta, GA. 9. Olszewski AJ, Egan PC, LeBlanc TW. Transfusion dependence and use of hospice among Medicare beneficiaries with leukemia. Abstract #277. Presented at the 2017 ASH Annual Meeting, December 9, 2017; Atlanta, GA. 10. Garcia D, Aguilera A, Antolin F, et al. Home transfusion: three decades of practice at a tertiary care hospital. Transfusion. 2018;58:2309-19. ASH Clinical News 49