Abraham A. Brody

Abstract

Background: The Affordable Care Act requires hospices to report quality measures across a range of processes and practices. Yet uncertainties exist regarding the impact of hospice preferred practices on patient outcomes. Objective: Assess the impact of 6 hospice preferred practices and hospice organizational characteristics on hospital utilization and death using the first national data on hospice preferred practices. Design: Longitudinal cohort study (2008-2011) of Medicare beneficiaries (N=149,814) newly enrolled in a national random sample of hospices (N=577) from the National Hospice Survey (84% response rate) and followed until death. Outcome Measures: The proportion of patients at each hospice admitted to the hospital, emergency department (ED), and intensive care unit (ICU), and who died in the hospital after hospice enrollment. Results: Hospices that reported assessing patient preferences for site of death at admission had lower odds of being in the highest quartile for hospital death (AOR=0.36; 95% CI, 0.14-0.93) and ED visits (AOR=0.27; 95% CI, 0.10-0.76). Hospices that reported more frequently monitoring symptoms had lower odds of being in the highest quartile for ICU stays (AOR=0.48; 95% CI, 0.24-0.94). In adjusted analyses, a higher proportion of patients at for-profit compared with nonprofit hospices experienced a hospital admission (15.3% vs. 10.9%, P<0.001), ED visit (21.8% vs. 15.6%, P<0.001), and ICU stay (5.1% vs. 3.0%, P<0.001). Conclusions: Hospitalization of patients following hospice enrollment varies substantially across hospices. Two of the 6 preferred practices examined were associated with hospitalization rates and for-profit hospices had persistently high hospitalization rates regardless of preferred practice implementation.

Abstract

Aims and objectives: The purpose of this paper is to provide recommendations to strengthen cardiovascular disease research with lesbian, gay and bisexual adults, and highlight implications for practice. Background: Lesbian, gay and bisexual individuals face significant discrimination that negatively impacts their health. Health disparities research in lesbian, gay and bisexual adults have focused on mental health, sexually transmitted infections and substance use. Although cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death and many lesbian, gay and bisexual adults report increased risk factors for cardiovascular disease, there has been limited research in this area. Design: This paper is a critical review. Methods: A literature search was conducted that compared cardiovascular disease risk and/or prevalence between lesbian, gay and bisexual and heterosexual adults. Results: Measures to assess cardiovascular disease risk factors and diagnoses varied widely across the 31 included studies. There was a lack of standardisation in definitions used for alcohol consumption, illicit drug use, mental health and self-rated physical health. Most studies that reported body mass index relied on participant self-report. Few studies included measures of physical activity and diet and those that did lacked standardisation. Only seven studies used laboratory data to establish diagnosis of cardiovascular disease. Conclusions: This study is the first comprehensive review on this topic. In cardiovascular disease research with lesbian, gay and bisexual adults, there is a need for: (1) inclusion of stress as a risk factor for cardiovascular disease, (2) standardised measures, (3) objective measures for determining the presence of cardiovascular disease, (4) data from electronic health records to strengthen the study of cardiovascular disease in this population. Relevance to clinical practice: Strengthening cardiovascular disease research in lesbian, gay and bisexual adults is an important step in addressing health disparities in this population. Nurses and other healthcare professionals should assess sexual orientation in routine health assessments.

Abstract

Purpose: The Hartford Gerontological Nursing Leaders (HGNL) formerly known as the Building Academic Geriatric Nursing Capacity Initiative (BAGNC), in conjunction with the National Hartford Centers of Gerontological Nursing Excellence (NHCGNE), developed and executed a peer mentoring program beginning in 2011 to enhance both (a) the experience of newly selected scholars and fellows to the NHCGNE and (b) the ongoing professional development of HGNL members. The purpose of this article is to describe key strategies used to develop and execute the peer mentoring program and to present formative program evaluation. Design: The program was launched in January 2011 with seven peer mentor and mentee matches. In June 2012, the peer mentoring committee solicited feedback on the development of the peer mentoring program and changes were made for the subsequent cohorts. Findings: An additional 12 matches were made in the following 2 years (2012 and 2013), for a total of 31 matches to date. We have learned several key lessons from our three cohorts regarding how to structure, implement, and carefully evaluate a peer mentoring program. Conclusions: Informal evaluation of our peer mentoring program noted several challenges for both peer mentors and mentees. Having knowledge of and addressing those challenges may increase the overall quality and effectiveness of peer mentoring programs and, in turn, benefit academic nursing by strengthening the faculty workforce. Clinical Relevance: Findings from development and implementation of a peer mentoring program for gerontological faculty could lead to new and adaptable programs in a variety of clinical and education settings.

Abstract

Hospice and palliative nursing care occurs in most practice settings, at all stages of chronic illness, and for persons of all ages. Thus, the Hospice and Palliative Nurses Association (HPNA) seeks to provide direction for research by highlighting key gaps in knowledge that serve as barriers to excellent care. The 2015-2018 HPNA Research is designed to (1) provide a focus for graduate students and researchers, (2) guide research funding by the Hospice and Palliative Nurses Foundation, and (3) illustrate to other stakeholders the importance of these research foci. The agenda also begins to outline a procedure for HPNA development and endorsement of clinical practice guidelines. The resulting document has been developed for all HPNA members regardless of role: clinical, academic, or research. Hospice and Palliative Nurses Association members were asked to select from among the 8 domains of the National Consensus Project which domain encompassed the most pressing gaps in knowledge. The 2 most frequently selected domains were (1) structure and processes of care and (2) physical aspects of care. The third component of this agenda, also member driven, will focus on the process of research translation in palliative nursing. While all research in palliative care is important to patients, the 2015-2018 HPNA Research Agenda identifies specific target areas to bring focus to research efforts and highlights the importance of research translation.

Abstract

Older patients who live in rural areas often have limited access to specialty geriatric care, which can help in identifying and managing geriatric conditions associated with functional decline. Implementation of geriatric-focused practices among rural primary care providers has been limited, because rural providers often lack access to training in geriatrics and to geriatricians for consultation. To bridge this gap, four Geriatric Research, Education, and Clinical Centers, which are centers of excellence across the nation for geriatric care within the Veteran health system, have developed a program utilizing telemedicine to connect with rural providers to improve access to specialized geriatric interdisciplinary care. In addition, case-based education via teleconferencing using cases brought by rural providers was developed to complement the clinical implementation efforts. In this article, the authors review these educational approaches in the implementation of the clinical interventions and discuss the potential advantages in improving implementation efforts.