Literature DB >> 30790720

Multiple Stakeholders' Perspectives Regarding Barriers to Hospice Enrollment in Diverse Patient Populations: A Qualitative Study.

Katherine Cicolello1, Gowri Anandarajah2.   

Abstract

CONTEXT: Although studies show disparities in hospice care utilization, many questions remain regarding the causes of these disparities. Most studies focus on a single ethnic/racial group, and most use physician informants. None compare and contrast views of multiple stakeholders or use a systems approach within a single geographic region.
OBJECTIVES: To gain an in-depth understanding of causes of hospice enrollment disparities in diverse patient populations within one state in the U.S.
METHODS: We conducted in-depth, individual interviews with multiple stakeholders in hospice care for diverse communities in Rhode Island. We identified participants through purposeful and snowball sampling strategies, aiming for a maximum variation sample. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using a multistep grounded theory approach.
RESULTS: Participants, self-identifying from a wide variety of ethnic backgrounds, included physicians, nurses, social workers, chaplains, nursing assistants, administrators, and caregivers. Five themes emerged regarding patient- and provider-level barriers to hospice enrollment: 1) universal challenges of goals of care (GOC) conversations; 2) cultural norms and beliefs; 3) language barriers; 4) provider-specific challenges; and 5) trust. In minority populations, the central theme of GOC conversation challenges was intensified by the other four themes. Suggested solutions included 1) increased palliative care training; 2) "cultural interpreters" from local communities; 3) specially trained "GOC language interpreters"; 4) improved workforce diversity; and 5) community-level advocacy.
CONCLUSION: The disparity in hospice enrollment among diverse patient populations is a complex and nuanced problem, involving numerous interrelated barriers. Addressing this disparity will require innovative solutions at multiple levels.
Copyright © 2019 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Hospice; communication; disparities; end of life; goals of care; qualitative study

Year:  2019        PMID: 30790720     DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2019.02.012

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage        ISSN: 0885-3924            Impact factor:   3.612


  6 in total

1.  A "Good Death" for All: The Need to Teach Racially Sensitive End-of-Life Care.

Authors:  Derrick W Williams; Claire M Quinlan; Andrea E Reid
Journal:  J Gen Intern Med       Date:  2022-06-16       Impact factor: 6.473

2.  TILE-12 index: an interpretable instrument for identifying older adults at risk for transitions in living environment within the next 12-months.

Authors:  Makayla Roma; Suzanne S Sullivan; Sabrina Casucci
Journal:  Home Health Care Serv Q       Date:  2022-04-08

3.  Building trust and facilitating goals of care conversations: A qualitative study in people with heart failure receiving home hospice care.

Authors:  Dawon Baik; David Russell; Lizeyka Jordan; Daniel D Matlock; Frances Dooley; Ruth Masterson Creber
Journal:  Palliat Med       Date:  2020-05-06       Impact factor: 4.762

Review 4.  Disparities in Palliative and Hospice Care and Completion of Advance Care Planning and Directives Among Non-Hispanic Blacks: A Scoping Review of Recent Literature.

Authors:  Mohsen Bazargan; Shahrzad Bazargan-Hejazi
Journal:  Am J Hosp Palliat Care       Date:  2020-12-08       Impact factor: 2.500

5.  "It's Like a Death Sentence but It Really Isn't" What Patients and Families Want to Know About Hospice Care When Making End-of-Life Decisions.

Authors:  Channing E Tate; Grace Venechuk; Elinor J Brereton; Pilar Ingle; Larry A Allen; Megan A Morris; Daniel D Matlock
Journal:  Am J Hosp Palliat Care       Date:  2019-12-31       Impact factor: 2.500

Review 6.  Patient Portals to Support Palliative and End-of-Life Care: Scoping Review.

Authors:  M Pilar Ingle; Cristina Valdovinos; Kelsey L Ford; Shou Zhou; Sheana Bull; Starlynne Gornail; Xuhong Zhang; Jennifer Portz; Susan Moore
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2021-09-16       Impact factor: 5.428

  6 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.