Jennifer Moye1, Kelly Stolzmann2, Elizabeth J Auguste3, Andrew B Cohen4, Casey C Catlin5, Zachary S Sager6, Rachel E Weiskittle6, Cindy B Woolverton7, Heather L Connors8, Jennifer L Sullivan9. 1. VA New England Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC), Boston and Bedford, Massachusetts, USA; VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. Electronic address: Jennifer.moye@va.gov. 2. VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, Boston and Bedford, Massachusetts, USA. 3. VA New England Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC), Boston and Bedford, Massachusetts, USA; VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 4. VA Connecticut Healthcare System, West Haven, Connecticut, USA; Department of Medicine, Yale School of Medicine, New Haven, Connecticut, USA. 5. VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 6. VA New England Geriatric Research Education and Clinical Center (GRECC), Boston and Bedford, Massachusetts, USA; VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 7. VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Department of Psychiatry, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts, USA. 8. Center for Guardianship Excellence, Andover, Massachusetts, USA. 9. VA Boston Healthcare System, Boston, Massachusetts, USA; Center for Healthcare Organization and Implementation Research, Boston and Bedford, Massachusetts, USA; Department of Health Law, Policy and Management, Boston University School of Public Health, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.
Abstract
CONTEXT: Guardians are surrogate decision makers appointed by a court when other health care decision-makers are unable, unwilling, or unavailable to make decisions. Prior studies suggest that persons under guardianship may experience delays in transitions of care. OBJECTIVES: To compare quality of end-of-life care for persons under guardianship to a matched group on objective indicators and to identify narrative themes characterizing potential obstacles to quality end-of-life care. METHODS: One hundred sixty-seven persons under guardianship who died between 2003 and 2019 within the Veterans Healthcare Administration in Massachusetts and Connecticut matched on a 1:1 basis to persons without guardians. The groups were compared on treatment specialty at death, days of hospice and intensive care unit care, and receipt of palliative care consultation. Additionally, patient narratives for those under guardianship with extended lengths in intensive care unit were subjected to qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Overall, <1% were under guardianship. Within this sample of persons who died within the Veterans Health Administration, persons under guardianship were as likely as patients in the comparison group to receive palliative care consultation (odds ratio [CI] = 0.93 [.590-1.46], P = .359), but were more likely to have ethics consultation (odds ratio [CI] = 0.25 [0.66-0.92], P = .036) and have longer lengths of ICU admission (β = -.34, t = -2.70, P = .009). Qualitative findings suggest that issues related to family conflict, fluctuating medical course, and limitations in guardian authority may underlie extended lengths of stay. CONCLUSION: Guardianship appears to be rare, and as a rule, those under guardianship have equal access to hospice and palliative care within Veterans Health Administration. Guardianship may be associated with health-care challenges in a small number of cases, and this may drive perceptions of adverse outcomes. Published by Elsevier Inc.
CONTEXT: Guardians are surrogate decision makers appointed by a court when other health care decision-makers are unable, unwilling, or unavailable to make decisions. Prior studies suggest that persons under guardianship may experience delays in transitions of care. OBJECTIVES: To compare quality of end-of-life care for persons under guardianship to a matched group on objective indicators and to identify narrative themes characterizing potential obstacles to quality end-of-life care. METHODS: One hundred sixty-seven persons under guardianship who died between 2003 and 2019 within the Veterans Healthcare Administration in Massachusetts and Connecticut matched on a 1:1 basis to persons without guardians. The groups were compared on treatment specialty at death, days of hospice and intensive care unit care, and receipt of palliative care consultation. Additionally, patient narratives for those under guardianship with extended lengths in intensive care unit were subjected to qualitative analysis. RESULTS: Overall, <1% were under guardianship. Within this sample of persons who died within the Veterans Health Administration, persons under guardianship were as likely as patients in the comparison group to receive palliative care consultation (odds ratio [CI] = 0.93 [.590-1.46], P = .359), but were more likely to have ethics consultation (odds ratio [CI] = 0.25 [0.66-0.92], P = .036) and have longer lengths of ICU admission (β = -.34, t = -2.70, P = .009). Qualitative findings suggest that issues related to family conflict, fluctuating medical course, and limitations in guardian authority may underlie extended lengths of stay. CONCLUSION: Guardianship appears to be rare, and as a rule, those under guardianship have equal access to hospice and palliative care within Veterans Health Administration. Guardianship may be associated with health-care challenges in a small number of cases, and this may drive perceptions of adverse outcomes. Published by Elsevier Inc.
Entities:
Keywords:
Guardianship; end-of-life care; family conflict; hospice; intensive care; palliative care
Authors: Daniel N Ricotta; James J Parris; Ritika S Parris; David N Sontag; Kenneth J Mukamal Journal: J Hosp Med Date: 2018-02-05 Impact factor: 2.960
Authors: Timothy W Farrell; Eric Widera; Lisa Rosenberg; Craig D Rubin; Aanand D Naik; Ursula Braun; Alexia Torke; Ina Li; Caroline Vitale; Joseph Shega Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2016-11-22 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: J M Teno; E Fisher; M B Hamel; A W Wu; D J Murphy; N S Wenger; J Lynn; F E Harrell Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2000-05 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Angelos P Kassianos; Myria Ioannou; Marianna Koutsantoni; Haris Charalambous Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2017-09-20 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Douglas B White; J Randall Curtis; Leslie E Wolf; Thomas J Prendergast; Darren B Taichman; Gary Kuniyoshi; Frank Acerra; Bernard Lo; John M Luce Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2007-07-03 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Timothy W Farrell; Casey Catlin; Anna H Chodos; Aanand D Naik; Eric Widera; Jennifer Moye Journal: Clin Gerontol Date: 2019-07-15 Impact factor: 2.871