A comparison of end-of-life care quality for Veterans receiving hospice in VA nursing homes and community nursing homes.

Melissa W Wachterman, Dawn Smith, Joan G Carpenter, Hillary L Griffin, Joshua Thorpe, Shelli L Feder, Jillian Hoelter, Mary Ersek, Scott Shreve, Ann Kutney-Lee
Author Information
  1. Melissa W Wachterman: Section of General Internal Medicine, Veterans Affairs Boston Health Care System, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
  2. Dawn Smith: Veteran Experience Center, Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
  3. Joan G Carpenter: Veteran Experience Center, Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
  4. Hillary L Griffin: Veteran Experience Center, Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.
  5. Joshua Thorpe: Center for Health Equity Research and Promotion, Pittsburgh VA Medical Center, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, USA.
  6. Shelli L Feder: Yale University School of Nursing, Orange, Connecticut, USA. ORCID
  7. Jillian Hoelter: University of Maryland School of Nursing, Baltimore, Maryland, USA. ORCID
  8. Mary Ersek: Veteran Experience Center, Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA. ORCID
  9. Scott Shreve: US Department of Veteran Affairs, Hospice and Palliative Care Program, Washington, DC, USA.
  10. Ann Kutney-Lee: Veteran Experience Center, Corporal Michael J. Crescenz VA Medical Center, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: While the Veterans Health Administration (VA) has long provided hospice care within VA community living centers (CLCs, i.e., VA nursing homes), an increasing number of Veterans are receiving hospice in VA-contracted community nursing homes (CNHs). However, little data exist about the quality of end-of-life (EOL) care provided in CNHs. The aim of this study was to compare family ratings of the quality of EOL care provided to Veterans receiving hospice in VA CLCs and VA-contracted CNHs.
METHODS: We conducted a retrospective analysis of national data from VA's electronic medical record and Bereaved Family Survey (BFS) for Veterans who received hospice in VA CLCs or VA-contracted CNHs between October 2021 and March 2022. The final sample included 1238 Veterans who died in either a CLC (n = 1012) or a CNH (n = 226) and whose next-of-kin completed the BFS. Our primary outcome was the BFS global rating of care received in the last 30 days of life. Secondary outcomes included BFS items related to symptom management, communication, emotional and spiritual support, and information about burial and survivor benefits. We compared unadjusted and adjusted proportions for all BFS outcomes between those who received hospice in CLCs and CNHs.
RESULTS: The adjusted proportion of family members who gave the best possible rating (a score of 9 or 10 out of a possible 10) for the overall care received near EOL was more than 13 percentage points higher for Veterans who received hospice in VA CLCs compared to VA-contracted CNHs. Our findings also revealed quality gaps of even greater magnitude in specific EOL care-focused domains.
CONCLUSIONS: Our findings document inadequacies in the quality of multiple aspects of EOL care provided to Veterans in CNH-based hospice and illuminate the urgent need for policy and practice interventions to improve this care.

Keywords

References

  1. J Palliat Med. 2010 May;13(5):525-33 [PMID: 20377497]
  2. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2016 Mar;51(3):546-56 [PMID: 26620233]
  3. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2017 Apr 1;18(4):320-325 [PMID: 27956073]
  4. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2022 Dec;64(6):e317-e322 [PMID: 36103938]
  5. J Clin Oncol. 2010 Oct 10;28(29):4457-64 [PMID: 20837950]
  6. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2020 Jun;68(6):1218-1225 [PMID: 32039474]
  7. Med Care. 2020 Apr;58(4):329-335 [PMID: 31985587]
  8. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2015 Mar;49(3):570-7 [PMID: 25116912]
  9. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2016 May;33(4):354-62 [PMID: 25422516]
  10. J Palliat Med. 2015 Oct;18(10):858-64 [PMID: 26172910]
  11. BMJ. 1995 Jan 21;310(6973):170 [PMID: 7833759]
  12. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2017 Feb;53(2):198-207 [PMID: 27815169]
  13. J Palliat Med. 2016 Dec;19(12):1304-1311 [PMID: 27529742]
  14. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2014 Dec;48(6):1100-7 [PMID: 24819082]
  15. BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2019 Mar;9(1):e13 [PMID: 27531840]
  16. Health Aff (Millwood). 2019 Jul;38(7):1095-1100 [PMID: 31260368]
  17. J Palliat Med. 2019 Jun;22(6):708-713 [PMID: 31158048]
  18. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2022 Feb;23(2):247-252 [PMID: 34953767]
  19. J Palliat Med. 2022 Jan;25(1):15-20 [PMID: 34665652]
  20. N Engl J Med. 2022 Mar 17;386(11):1008-1010 [PMID: 35275480]
  21. J Am Psychiatr Nurses Assoc. 2012 Sep-Oct;18(5):278-98 [PMID: 23053745]
  22. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2021 May;61(5):983-990 [PMID: 32976941]
  23. Health Aff (Millwood). 2017 Jul 1;36(7):1274-1282 [PMID: 28679815]
  24. Healthc (Amst). 2021 Jun;9(2):100494 [PMID: 33992224]

Grants

  1. K12 HL138037/NHLBI NIH HHS
  2. K23 AG049088/NIA NIH HHS
  3. L30 HL159709/NHLBI NIH HHS
  4. K23AG049088-05/NIA NIH HHS

MeSH Term

Humans
United States
Hospice Care
Veterans
Hospices
Retrospective Studies
Terminal Care
Nursing Homes
Surveys and Questionnaires
United States Department of Veterans Affairs

Word Cloud

Created with Highcharts 10.0.0VeteranshospicecareVACNHsqualityCLCsnursingEOLBFSreceivedprovidedhomesVA-contractedcommunityreceivingend-of-lifedatafamilyincludedratingoutcomescomparedadjustedpossible10findingsBACKGROUND:HealthAdministrationlongwithinlivingcentersieincreasingnumberHoweverlittleexistaimstudycompareratingsMETHODS:conductedretrospectiveanalysisnationalVA'selectronicmedicalrecordBereavedFamilySurveyOctober2021March2022finalsample1238diedeitherCLCn = 1012CNHn = 226whosenext-of-kincompletedprimaryoutcomegloballast30 dayslifeSecondaryitemsrelatedsymptommanagementcommunicationemotionalspiritualsupportinformationburialsurvivorbenefitsunadjustedproportionsRESULTS:proportionmembersgavebestscore9overallnear13percentagepointshigheralsorevealedgapsevengreatermagnitudespecificcare-focuseddomainsCONCLUSIONS:documentinadequaciesmultipleaspectsCNH-basedilluminateurgentneedpolicypracticeinterventionsimprovecomparisonhome

Similar Articles

Cited By