Epidemiological Predictors of Financial Toxicity in Surgical Burn Injuries: A Multicenter, Longitudinal, Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Burns constitute a major global health challenge, causing over 11 million injuries and 300,000 deaths annually and surpassing the economic burden of cervical cancer and HIV combined. Despite this, patient-level financial consequences of burn injuries remain poorly quantified, with a significant gap in data from low- and middle-income countries. In this study, we evaluate financial toxicity in burn patients.

METHODS: A prospective, multicenter cohort study was conducted across two tertiary care hospitals in India, assessing 123 adult surgical in-patients undergoing operative interventions for burn injuries. Patient sociodemographic, clinical, and financial data were collected through surveys and electronic records during hospitalization and at 1, 3, and 6 months postoperatively. Out-of-pocket costs (OOPCs) for surgical burn treatment were evaluated during hospitalization. Longitudinal changes in income, employment status, and affordability of basic subsistence needs were assessed at the 1-, 3-, and 6-month postoperative time point. Degree of financial toxicity was calculated using a combination of the metrics catastrophic health expenditure and financial hardship. Development of financial toxicity was compared by sociodemographic and clinical characteristics using logistic regression models.

RESULTS: Of the cohort, 60% experienced financial toxicity. Median OOPCs was US$555.32 with the majority of OOPCs stemming from direct nonmedical costs (US$318.45). Cost of initial hospitalization exceeded monthly annual income by 80%. Following surgical burn care, income decreased by US$318.18 within 6 months, accompanied by a 53% increase in unemployment rates. At least 40% of the cohort consistently reported inability to afford basic subsistence needs within the 6-month perioperative period. Significant predictors of developing financial toxicity included male gender (odds ratio, 4.17; 95% confidence interval, 1.25-14.29; P = 0.02) and hospital stays exceeding 20 days (odds ratio, 11.17; 95% confidence interval, 2.11-59.22; P ≤ 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS: Surgical treatment for burn injuries is associated with substantial financial toxicity. National and local policies must expand their scope beyond direct medical costs to address direct nonmedical and indirect costs. These include burn care insurance, teleconsultation follow-ups, hospital-affiliated subsidized lodging, and resources for occupational support and rehabilitation. These measures are crucial to alleviate the financial burden of burn care, particularly during the perioperative period.