Abraham A. Brody

Abstract

Context: The critical role of hospice and palliative care in response to the COVID-19 pandemic is well recognized, but there is limited evidence to guide healthcare leadership through future crises. Objectives: Our goal was to support future organizational resilience by exploring hospice and palliative team members’ perspectives on crisis leadership during the COVID-19 pandemic in New York City (NYC). Methods: This qualitative descriptive study used individual, semi-structured interviews of purposively sampled interdisciplinary team members. Enrollment sites were two large NYC metro hospice care organizations and one outpatient palliative care practice. We asked participants to complete a demographic form and a 45–60 minute interview. We used descriptive statistics and thematic analysis, respectively, for data analysis. We triangulated the data by presenting preliminary study findings to a group of clinicians (n=21) from one of the referring organizations. Results: Participants (n=30) were professionally diverse (e.g., nurses, physicians, social workers, chaplains, administrators), experienced (mean=17 years; 10 years in hospice), and highly educated (83% ≥ master's degree). About half (n=15) self-identified as white, non-Hispanic, and nearly half (n=13) self-identified as being from a racial/ethnic minoritized group. Two (n=2) did not wish to self-identify. We identified four themes that reflected challenges and adaptive responses to providing care during a crisis: Stay Open and Stay Safe; Act Flexibly; Lead Adaptively; and Create a Culture of Solidarity. Conclusion: While additional work is indicated, findings offer direction for a crisis management playbook to guide leadership in hospice, palliative care, and other healthcare settings in future crises.

Abstract

The critical role of hospice and palliative care in response to the COVID-19 pandemic is well recognized, but there is limited evidence to guide healthcare leadership through future crises.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Medicare-funded home healthcare (HHC) delivers skilled nursing, therapy, and related services through visits to the patient's home. Nearly one-third (31%) of HHC patients have diagnosed dementia, but little is currently known regarding how HHC utilization and care delivery differ for persons living with dementia (PLwD). METHODS: We drew on linked 2012-2018 Health and Retirement Study and Medicare claims for a national cohort of 1 940 community-living older adults. We described differences in HHC admission, length of stay, and referral source by patient dementia status and used weighted, multivariable logistic and negative binomial models to estimate the relationship between dementia and HHC visit type and intensity while adjusting for sociodemographic characteristics, health and functional status, and geographic/community factors. RESULTS: PLwD had twice the odds of using HHC during a 2-year observation period, compared to those without dementia (odds ratio [OR]: 2.03; p < .001). They were more likely to be referred to HHC without a preceding hospitalization (49.4% vs 32.1%; p < .001) and incurred a greater number of HHC episodes (1.4 vs 1.0; p < .001) and a longer median HHC length of stay (55.8 days vs 40.0 days; p < .001). Among post-acute HHC patients, PLwD had twice the odds of receiving social work services (unadjusted odds ratio [aOR]: 2.15; p = .008) and 3 times the odds of receiving speech-language pathology services (aOR: 2.92; p = .002). CONCLUSIONS: Findings highlight HHC's importance as a care setting for community-living PLwD and indicate the need to identify care delivery patterns associated with positive outcomes for PLwD and design tailored HHC clinical pathways for this patient subpopulation.

Abstract

Utilizing a participatory approach, we sought to co-design a 12-week Green Activity Program (GAP) with Hispanic/Latino individuals living with memory challenges and their care partners, local outdoor professionals, and healthcare providers.

Abstract

Social determinants of health (SDOH) impacted the quality of home hospice care provided during the COVID-19 pandemic. Perspectives from professionals who provided care identify challenges and lessons learned from their experience. To examine hospice professionals' perspectives of how SDOH affected the delivery of high-quality home hospice care in New York City (NYC) during the COVID-19 pandemic. We conducted semistructured interviews with 30 hospice professionals who delivered care to home hospice patients during the COVID-19 pandemic in NYC using a qualitative descriptive design. Purposive sampling was used to recruit professionals from a range of disciplines including physicians, advanced practice providers, nurses, social workers, chaplains, and hospice administration and management. Participants worked for one of two large NYC metro hospices and one outpatient palliative care practice serving the five boroughs of NYC and the surrounding suburbs. Rapid qualitative analysis was used to identify themes. Thirty hospice professionals were interviewed, spanning a variety of clinical and administrative roles. Most (21 out of 30) reported that social determinants affected access and/or delivery of equitable hospice care. Two key themes emerged from interviews: (1) SDOH exist and affect the delivery of high-quality care and (2) disparities were exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic resulting in barriers to care. Subthemes outline barriers described by hospice professionals: decreased hospice enrollment, telehealth challenges, resulting in deficient patient/family education, shortages of nursing assistants in some neighborhoods, and diminished overall quality of hospice care for some patients. SDOH created barriers to hospice care through neighborhood factors, resource barriers, and system challenges. SDOH provide a context to understand disparity in the provision of hospice care. COVID-19 exacerbated these conditions. Addressing multidimensional barriers created by SDOH is key in creating high-quality and equitable hospice care, particularly during a crisis.

Abstract

Purpose: Utilizing a participatory approach, we sought to co-design a 12-week Green Activity Program (GAP) with Hispanic/Latino individuals living with memory challenges and their care partners, local outdoor professionals, and healthcare providers. Methods: Participants were recruited via convenience and snowball sampling in the Bronx, New York with Hispanic/Latino persons living with memory challenges and care partners, outdoor activity professionals, and interdisciplinary healthcare providers/dementia experts. Co-design occurred iteratively with 5 focus groups and 4 individual interviews lasting 30–90 min and focused on program and research design. Sessions were recorded and transcribed. Utilizing directed content analysis data was coded using a priori codes program design and research design. Results: 21 participants completed co-design activities: (n = 8 outdoor activity professionals, n = 6 Hispanic/Latino persons living with memory challenges and care partners, and n = 7 interdisciplinary healthcare providers/dementia experts). Participant preferences for program design were captured by subcodes session duration (30–90 min), frequency (4–8 sessions), and delivery modes (in-person and phone). Participants' preferred nature activities included group exercise and outdoor crafts [crocheting], outcomes of social participation, connectedness to nature, decreased loneliness, and stewardship were identified. Preferred language for recruiting and describing the program were “memory challenges,” “Hispanic/Latino,” and “wellbeing.” Referral pathways were identified including community-based organizations and primary care. Conclusion: Co-design was a successful form of engagement for people living with memory challenges that enabled participants to help design key elements of the GAP and research design. Our processes, findings, and recommendations for tailoring co-design to engage Hispanic/Latino people living with memory challenges can inform the development of other programs for this population.

Abstract

Context: Social determinants of health (SDOH) impacted the quality of home hospice care provided during the COVID-19 pandemic. Perspectives from professionals who provided care identify challenges and lessons learned from their experience. Objective: To examine hospice professionals’ perspectives of how SDOH affected the delivery of high-quality home hospice care in New York City (NYC) during the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: We conducted semistructured interviews with 30 hospice professionals who delivered care to home hospice patients during the COVID-19 pandemic in NYC using a qualitative descriptive design. Purposive sampling was used to recruit professionals from a range of disciplines including physicians, advanced practice providers, nurses, social workers, chaplains, and hospice administration and management. Participants worked for one of two large NYC metro hospices and one outpatient palliative care practice serving the five boroughs of NYC and the surrounding suburbs. Rapid qualitative analysis was used to identify themes. Results: Thirty hospice professionals were interviewed, spanning a variety of clinical and administrative roles. Most (21 out of 30) reported that social determinants affected access and/or delivery of equitable hospice care. Two key themes emerged from interviews: (1) SDOH exist and affect the delivery of high-quality care and (2) disparities were exacerbated during the COVID-19 pandemic resulting in barriers to care. Subthemes outline barriers described by hospice professionals: decreased hospice enrollment, telehealth challenges, resulting in deficient patient/family education, shortages of nursing assistants in some neighborhoods, and diminished overall quality of hospice care for some patients. SDOH created barriers to hospice care through neighborhood factors, resource barriers, and system challenges. Conclusion: SDOH provide a context to understand disparity in the provision of hospice care. COVID-19 exacerbated these conditions. Addressing multidimensional barriers created by SDOH is key in creating high-quality and equitable hospice care, particularly during a crisis.

Abstract

Understanding the complex care needs of seriously ill adults with multiple chronic conditions with and without cancer is critical for the delivery of high-quality serious illness and palliative care at the end of life. The objective of this secondary data analysis of a multisite randomized clinical trial in palliative care was to elucidate the clinical profile and complex care needs of seriously ill adults with multiple chronic conditions and to highlight key differences among those with and without cancer at the end of life. Of the 213 (74.2%) older adults who met criteria for multiple chronic conditions (eg, 2 or more chronic conditions requiring regular care with limitations of daily living), 49% had a diagnosis of cancer. Hospice enrollment was operationalized as an indicator for severity of illness and allowed for the capture of complex care needs of those deemed to be nearing the end of life. Individuals with cancer had complex symptomatology with a higher prevalence of nausea, drowsiness, and poor appetite and end of life and lower hospice enrollment. Individuals with multiple chronic conditions without cancer had lower functional status, greater number of medications, and higher hospice enrollment. The care of seriously ill older adults with multiple chronic conditions requires tailored approaches to improve outcomes and quality of care across health care settings, particularly at the end of life.

Abstract

Understanding the complex care needs of seriously ill adults with multiple chronic conditions with and without cancer is critical for the delivery of high-quality serious illness and palliative care at the end of life. The objective of this secondary data analysis of a multisite randomized clinical trial in palliative care was to elucidate the clinical profile and complex care needs of seriously ill adults with multiple chronic conditions and to highlight key differences among those with and without cancer at the end of life. Of the 213 (74.2%) older adults who met criteria for multiple chronic conditions (eg, 2 or more chronic conditions requiring regular care with limitations of daily living), 49% had a diagnosis of cancer. Hospice enrollment was operationalized as an indicator for severity of illness and allowed for the capture of complex care needs of those deemed to be nearing the end of life. Individuals with cancer had complex symptomatology with a higher prevalence of nausea, drowsiness, and poor appetite and end of life and lower hospice enrollment. Individuals with multiple chronic conditions without cancer had lower functional status, greater number of medications, and higher hospice enrollment. The care of seriously ill older adults with multiple chronic conditions requires tailored approaches to improve outcomes and quality of care across health care settings, particularly at the end of life.

Abstract

Background: As more Americans age in place, it is critical to understand care delivery in the home. However, data on the range of home-based services provided by Medicare is limited. We define a taxonomy of clinical care in the home funded through fee-for-service Medicare and methods to identify receipt of those services. Methods: We analyzed Fee-for-service (FFS) Medicare claims data from a nationally-representative cohort of older adults, the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS), to identify home-based clinical care. We included 6,664 NHATS enrollees age ≥ 70 and living in the community, observed an average of 3 times each on claims-linked NHATS surveys. We examined provider and service type of home-based clinical care to identify a taxonomy of 5 types: home-based medical care (physician, physician assistant, or nurse practitioner visits), home-based podiatry, skilled home health care (SHHC), hospice, and other fee-for-service (FFS) home-based care. We further characterized home-based clinical care by detailed care setting and visit types. Results: From 2011–2016, 17.8%-20.8% of FFS Medicare beneficiaries age ≥ 70 received Medicare-funded home-based clinical care. SHHC was the most common service (12.8%-16.1%), followed by other FFS home-based care (5.5%-6.5%), home-based medical care (3.2%-3.9%), and hospice (2.6%-3.0%). Examination of the other-FFS home-based care revealed imaging/diagnostics and laboratory testing to be the most common service. Conclusions: We define a taxonomy of clinical care provided in the home, serving 1 in 5 FFS Medicare beneficiaries. This approach can be used to identify and address research and clinical care gaps in home-based clinical care delivery.