Purpose: This survey aimed to develop a methodology for measuring the quality indicators of end-of-life care for cancer patients using the Japanese National Database, which was comprised of the health insurance claim data of all Japanese people. Methods: Life-sustaining treatment (LST) and chemotherapy near the time of death are accepted as reliable indicators of poor quality end-of-life care. To measure these, the Sampling Data Set (SDS) from the National Database (NDB) was used. Results: 1,233 cancer patients were studied, who had died from 14th to 31st October, 2012. The rates of LST and chemotherapy in the final 14 days of life were 8.2% (95%CI 6.7-10.1), 3.5% (2.6-4.8) for inpatients (n=1,079) respectively. In the SDS, 27-70% of chemotherapy drugs were not named, in order to prevent identification of patients receiving rare treatment. Discussion: The figures for rates of chemotherapy might be underestimated in the sampling data set, because of the anonymization of rare treatment. And in-patient and out-patient data may in some cases have been duplicated when entries applied to the same person. In the future using the NDB, it might be possible overcome some of these limitations.

Purpose：To explore a methodology for evaluating end-of-life （EOL） cancer care using diagnosis procedure combination （DPC） administrative data. Methods： We investigated care provided to inpatients whose deaths were attributed to cancer and occurred between August 2010 and December 2012. We measured the quality of palliative care by dividing the decedents into two groups： those who died in the palliative care unit （PCU） and those who died in the general wards（GW）. Results： A total of 311 inpatient deaths were identified as cancer deaths. Of these, 147 patients were included in the PCU group and 164 in the GW group. We calculated the DPC data as follows： the rates of chemotherapy administered within 30 days before death （PCU 0％, GW 27％） and within 14 days before death （PCU 0％, GW 10％）, admission to the intensive care unit （PCU 0％, GW 2％）, life-sustaining interventions （PCU 0％, GW 3％）, rehabilitation sessions （PCU 10％, GW 26％）, emergency admission （PCU 2％, GW 27％）, and antibiotics （PCU 32％, GW 28％）. In the PCU group, rates of chemotherapy and emergency admission were significantly lower（＜0.0001；＜0.0001, respectively）, and rehabilitation sessions were significantly higher （p＝0.0002） than in the GW group. Conclusion： EOL care in a university hospital can be easily investigated using DPC data. Some limitations are the single-site study design, the health insurance system, and secondary use of administrative data. However, this methodology may be adapted to investigate the entire Japanese claim database and to evaluate EOL cancer care.