# Survival Time Disparities after Palliative Care Use Among Low-Income Patients on Social Welfare Programs: A Retrospective Cohort Study

## TL;DR

This study examines how social welfare programs affect survival time and end-of-life care for low-income cancer patients receiving palliative care in Kyoto.

## Contribution

The study is the first to investigate how specific social welfare services influence end-of-life experiences for low-income cancer patients.

## Key findings

- FLCMC beneficiaries had shorter survival times compared to nonusers.
- No home deaths were observed among welfare service recipients.
- PA beneficiaries showed no significant survival difference compared to nonusers.

## Abstract

Relieving the total pain of patients with cancer and supporting their well-being throughout their lives are important roles of palliative and supportive care. Poverty may inhibit patients from receiving dignified end-of-life care; however, using social welfare services may reduce its impact on patients’ end-of-life experiences. Nevertheless, no study has investigated which social welfare service could lead to favorable end-of-life experiences for patients living in poverty.

This study aimed to describe the characteristics of users of palliative care among low-income patients and examine the difference in survival time among patients with cancer on social welfare services in a single center in Kyoto, Japan.

We conducted a retrospective cohort study.

We included 220 patients using Public Assistance (PA: aid minimum income and medical/long-term care), Free/Low-Cost Medical Care (FLCMC: aid only medical care), and nonwelfare-users who newly received palliative care in 2021.

We calculated patients’ survival time from the initiation of palliative care to death. In addition, we identified patients who experienced home death.

Compared with nonusers, FLCMC beneficiaries had shorter survival times (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.05, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.80–5.22). No difference was observed among PA beneficiaries (aHR 1.19, 95% CI 0.49–2.87). No home death was observed among welfare service recipients.

Social welfare benefits only for medical expenses may not sufficiently support dignified end-of-life care for low-income patients. Further studies are required to examine the robustness of this study considering various bio-psycho-social factors that can influence these findings, to support low-income patients with cancer on social welfare services.