Angela R Ghesquiere1, Melissa D Aldridge2, Rosemary Johnson-Hürzeler3, Daniel Kaplan4, Martha L Bruce4,5, Elizabeth Bradley6,7,8,9. 1. Brookdale Center for Health Aging, Hunter College, City University of New York, New York, New York. 2. Department of Geriatrics and Palliative Medicine, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai, New York, New York. 3. Connecticut Hospice and the Hospice Institute for Education, Training and Research, Branford, Connecticut. 4. Department of Psychiatry, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Weill Cornell Medical College, White Plains, New York. 5. Clinical Epidemiology Program, Graduate School of Medical Sciences, Weill Cornell Medical College, White Plains, New York. 6. Global Health Initiative, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut. 7. Global Health Leadership Institute, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut. 8. Branford College, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut. 9. School of Public Health, Yale University, New Haven, Connecticut.
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: To describe the prevalence of screening for complicated grief (CG) and depression in hospice and access to bereavement therapy and to examine whether screening and access to therapy varied according to hospice organizational characteristics or staff training and involvement. DESIGN: Cross-sectional national survey conducted from 2008 to 2009. SETTING: United States. PARTICIPANTS: Hospices (N = 591). MEASUREMENTS: Whether hospices screened for depression or CG at the time of death or provided access to bereavement therapy (individual or group). Organizational characteristics included region, chain status, ownership, and patient volume. Staffing-related variables included training length and meeting attendance requirements. RESULTS: Fifty-five percent of hospices provided screening for CG and depression and access to bereavement therapy, 13% provided screening but not access to bereavement therapy, 24% provided access to bereavement therapy but not screening, and 8% neither screened nor provided access to bereavement therapy. Hospices with 100 patients per day or more were significantly more likely to provide screening and access to bereavement therapy. CONCLUSION: Hospices appear to have high capacity to provide screening for CG and depression and to deliver group and individual therapy, but data are needed on whether screeners are evidence based and whether therapy addresses CG or depression specifically. Future work could build upon existing infrastructure to ensure use of well-validated screeners and evidence-based therapies.
OBJECTIVES: To describe the prevalence of screening for complicated grief (CG) and depression in hospice and access to bereavement therapy and to examine whether screening and access to therapy varied according to hospice organizational characteristics or staff training and involvement. DESIGN: Cross-sectional national survey conducted from 2008 to 2009. SETTING: United States. PARTICIPANTS: Hospices (N = 591). MEASUREMENTS: Whether hospices screened for depression or CG at the time of death or provided access to bereavement therapy (individual or group). Organizational characteristics included region, chain status, ownership, and patient volume. Staffing-related variables included training length and meeting attendance requirements. RESULTS: Fifty-five percent of hospices provided screening for CG and depression and access to bereavement therapy, 13% provided screening but not access to bereavement therapy, 24% provided access to bereavement therapy but not screening, and 8% neither screened nor provided access to bereavement therapy. Hospices with 100 patients per day or more were significantly more likely to provide screening and access to bereavement therapy. CONCLUSION: Hospices appear to have high capacity to provide screening for CG and depression and to deliver group and individual therapy, but data are needed on whether screeners are evidence based and whether therapy addresses CG or depression specifically. Future work could build upon existing infrastructure to ensure use of well-validated screeners and evidence-based therapies.
Authors: Colleen L Barry; Melissa D A Carlson; Jennifer W Thompson; Mark Schlesinger; Ruth McCorkle; Stanislav V Kasl; Elizabeth H Bradley Journal: Med Care Date: 2012-07 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Melissa D Aldridge; Mark Schlesinger; Colleen L Barry; R Sean Morrison; Ruth McCorkle; Rosemary Hürzeler; Elizabeth H Bradley Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2014-04 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Jessica Y Allen; William E Haley; Brent J Small; Ron S Schonwetter; Susan C McMillan Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2013-05-22 Impact factor: 2.947