Helena Temkin-Greener1, Qinghua Li2, Yue Li1, Micah Segelman2, Dana B Mukamel3. 1. 1 Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Rochester School of Medicine and Dentistry , Rochester, New York. 2. 2 RTI International, Waltham, Massachusetts. 3. 3 Department of Medicine, University of California , Irvine, California.
Abstract
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVE: Nursing homes (NHs) are an important setting for the provision of palliative and end-of-life (EOL) care. Excessive reliance on hospitalizations at EOL and infrequent enrollment in hospice are key quality concerns in this setting. We examined the association between communication-among NH providers and between providers and residents/family members-and two EOL quality measures (QMs): in-hospital deaths and hospice use. DESIGN AND METHODS: We developed two measures of communication by using a survey tool implemented in a random sample of U.S. NHs in 2011-12. Using secondary data (Minimum Data Set, Medicare, and hospice claims), we developed two risk-adjusted quality metrics for in-hospital death and hospice use. In the 1201 NHs, which completed the survey, we identified 54,526 residents, age 65+, who died in 2011. Psychometric assessment of the two communication measures included principal factor and internal consistency reliability analyses. Random-effect logistic and weighted least-square regression models were estimated to develop facility-level risk-adjusted QMs, and to assess the effect of communication measures on the quality metrics. RESULTS: Better communication with residents/family members was statistically significantly (p = 0.015) associated with fewer in-hospital deaths. However, better communication among providers was significantly (p = 0.006) associated with lower use of hospice. CONCLUSIONS: Investing in NHs to improve communication between providers and residents/family may lead to fewer in-hospital deaths. Improved communication between providers appears to reduce, rather than increase, NH-to-hospice referrals. The actual impact of improved provider communication on residents' EOL care quality needs to be better understood.
BACKGROUND/ OBJECTIVE: Nursing homes (NHs) are an important setting for the provision of palliative and end-of-life (EOL) care. Excessive reliance on hospitalizations at EOL and infrequent enrollment in hospice are key quality concerns in this setting. We examined the association between communication-among NH providers and between providers and residents/family members-and two EOL quality measures (QMs): in-hospital deaths and hospice use. DESIGN AND METHODS: We developed two measures of communication by using a survey tool implemented in a random sample of U.S. NHs in 2011-12. Using secondary data (Minimum Data Set, Medicare, and hospice claims), we developed two risk-adjusted quality metrics for in-hospital death and hospice use. In the 1201 NHs, which completed the survey, we identified 54,526 residents, age 65+, who died in 2011. Psychometric assessment of the two communication measures included principal factor and internal consistency reliability analyses. Random-effect logistic and weighted least-square regression models were estimated to develop facility-level risk-adjusted QMs, and to assess the effect of communication measures on the quality metrics. RESULTS: Better communication with residents/family members was statistically significantly (p = 0.015) associated with fewer in-hospital deaths. However, better communication among providers was significantly (p = 0.006) associated with lower use of hospice. CONCLUSIONS: Investing in NHs to improve communication between providers and residents/family may lead to fewer in-hospital deaths. Improved communication between providers appears to reduce, rather than increase, NH-to-hospice referrals. The actual impact of improved provider communication on residents' EOL care quality needs to be better understood.
Authors: Kevin Brazil; Paul Krueger; Michel Bedard; Lou Kelley; Carrie McAiney; Christopher Justice; Alan Taniguchi Journal: J Palliat Care Date: 2006 Impact factor: 2.250
Authors: Pedro Gozalo; Joan M Teno; Susan L Mitchell; Jon Skinner; Julie Bynum; Denise Tyler; Vincent Mor Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2011-09-29 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Haiden A Huskamp; David G Stevenson; David C Grabowski; Eric Brennan; Nancy L Keating Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2010-08 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Carl Rudolf Blankart; Kees van Gool; Irene Papanicolas; Enrique Bernal-Delgado; Nicholas Bowden; Francisco Estupiñán-Romero; Robin Gauld; Hannah Knight; Olukorede Abiona; Kristen Riley; Andrew J Schoenfeld; Kosta Shatrov; Walter P Wodchis; Jose F Figueroa Journal: Health Serv Res Date: 2021-09-07 Impact factor: 3.402
Authors: Paul R Duberstein; Michael Chen; Michael Hoerger; Ronald M Epstein; Laura M Perry; Sule Yilmaz; Fahad Saeed; Supriya G Mohile; Sally A Norton Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2019-10-19 Impact factor: 3.612