Impact of Prospective Payment Models on Cancer Patient Care: A Systematic Review

• Escalating cancer care costs challenge healthcare system sustainability. • PPS can contribute to cost control while maintaining service utilization. • Mostly, PPS does not decrease quality indicators or survival • PPS can be a public policy tool that contributes to efficiency and coordination Cancer care faces increasing sustainability challenges due to the structural growth of health care costs, driven by longer survival, expanding treatment indications, and the rapid diffusion of high-cost technologies. In this context, policymakers have implemented prospective payment systems (PPS) as policy strategies to promote care coordination, efficiency, and resource optimization in oncology. To evaluate the association between the implementation of PPS and key outcomes in cancer care, including health care expenditure, service utilization, quality of care, and patient survival or mortality, compared with fee-for-service payment models. We conducted a systematic literature following PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies, published between 2000 and 2024, assessed PPS mechanisms in adult cancer patient populations, mostly using cohort and case–control studies. We synthesized evidence across four predefined domains: health expenditures, service utilization, quality of care, and survival or mortality. Across included studies, findings were heterogeneous and context dependent. Nine studies evaluated health expenditures, of which 90% reported reductions. Among six studies assessing service utilization, 66.7% found no significant variation. Eleven studies examined quality outcomes; 54.5% reported improvements. For survival, 57.1% of seven studies showed favourable results. Our review synthesizes the evidence on the implementation of PPS applied to cancer care compared with fee-for-service (FFS) models. PPS are consistently associated with cost containment, while evidence regarding utilization, quality, and survival remains mixed and, in some cases, inconclusive. Our findings underscore the potential of PPS as a policy instrument to improve financial sustainability in oncology, while also highlighting the need for careful design, implementation, and monitoring to mitigate unintended risks.

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
Health Policy
Published
2026-05-01
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.healthpol.2026.105651
Primary Topic
Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00
Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Impact of Prospective Payment Models on Cancer Patient Care: A Systematic Review

Ramón Abel Castaño-Yepes, Maricel Licht-Ardila, Juan Carlos García Ubaque, Alexandra Hurtado-Ortiz et al.
Health Policy
Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
article

Impact of Prospective Payment Models on Cancer Patient Care: A Systematic Review

Ramón Abel Castaño-Yepes, Maricel Licht-Ardila, Juan Carlos García Ubaque, Alexandra Hurtado-Ortiz, Edgar Fabián Manrique-Hernández, Sol Ochoa, Rafael Zuliban Pájaro-Martínez, Juan José Pérez-Acevedo
article en

Abstract

• Escalating cancer care costs challenge healthcare system sustainability. • PPS can contribute to cost control while maintaining service utilization. • Mostly, PPS does not decrease quality indicators or survival • PPS can be a public policy tool that contributes to efficiency and coordination Cancer care faces increasing sustainability challenges due to the structural growth of health care costs, driven by longer survival, expanding treatment indications, and the rapid diffusion of high-cost technologies. In this context, policymakers have implemented prospective payment systems (PPS) as policy strategies to promote care coordination, efficiency, and resource optimization in oncology. To evaluate the association between the implementation of PPS and key outcomes in cancer care, including health care expenditure, service utilization, quality of care, and patient survival or mortality, compared with fee-for-service payment models. We conducted a systematic literature following PRISMA guidelines. Eligible studies, published between 2000 and 2024, assessed PPS mechanisms in adult cancer patient populations, mostly using cohort and case–control studies. We synthesized evidence across four predefined domains: health expenditures, service utilization, quality of care, and survival or mortality. Across included studies, findings were heterogeneous and context dependent. Nine studies evaluated health expenditures, of which 90% reported reductions. Among six studies assessing service utilization, 66.7% found no significant variation. Eleven studies examined quality outcomes; 54.5% reported improvements. For survival, 57.1% of seven studies showed favourable results. Our review synthesizes the evidence on the implementation of PPS applied to cancer care compared with fee-for-service (FFS) models. PPS are consistently associated with cost containment, while evidence regarding utilization, quality, and survival remains mixed and, in some cases, inconclusive. Our findings underscore the potential of PPS as a policy instrument to improve financial sustainability in oncology, while also highlighting the need for careful design, implementation, and monitoring to mitigate unintended risks.

Health Policy
Ecopetrol (Colombia) (CO), Universidad de La Sabana (CO), Universidad Nacional de Córdoba (AR), Universidad El Bosque (CO), Universidad Nacional de Colombia (CO), Fundación Cardiovascular de Colombia (CO), Instituto Nacional de Salud (CO)
Openalex Percentile: Top 5%
Economic and Financial Impacts of Cancer
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.