Aggressive care at end-of-life in the Veteran’s Health Administration versus fee-for-service Medicare among patients with advanced lung cancer.

Abstract

12025 Background: The Veteran’s Health Administration (VHA) allows simultaneous receipt of cancer treatment and hospice care, termed concurrent care, while fee-for-service Medicare does not. Although many physicians who care for patients in the VHA also care for private sector patients, it is unclear whether there is a “spillover” relation between end of life (EOL) care in the VHA and Medicare systems at the regional level. We examined temporal trends, as well as regional-level associations between Medicare and VHA EOL practice for patients with advanced lung cancer. Methods: We conducted a retrospective study on VHA and SEER-Medicare (SM) decedents from 2006-2012 with stage IV non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) who received any lung cancer care. Aggressive care (AC) at EOL was defined as any of the following within 30 days of death– intensive care unit (ICU) admission, no-hospice care, cardiopulmonary resuscitation(CPR), mechanical ventilation (MV), > 1 inpatient admission and receipt of chemotherapy. Descriptive statistics were used to compare outcomes. We also analyzed the association between Medicare hospital referral region (HRR) hospice admissions, Medicare HRR EOL spending, and VHA AC use adjusted for patient’s characteristics using a random intercept mixed effect logistic regression model after matching VHA facilities with Medicare facilities in a particular HRR. Results: AC use significantly decreased during the study period, from 46% to 31% among 18,371 Veterans and from 42% to 38% among 25,283 in the SM cohort, (t-test P < .05). Hospice use significantly increased within both cohorts (p < .001). The receipt of chemotherapy at EOL was similar for both cohorts throughout the study period. Veterans who received care in regions with higher hospice admissions among Medicare beneficiaries were significantly less likely to receive AC at EOL (adjusted Odds Ratio (aOR): 0.13 95%CI: 0.08-0.23, P < .001) than veterans in regions with lower Medicare hospice use. Medicare HRR spending at the EOL was not associated with receipt of AC among Medicare beneficiaries (aOR): 1.004 95%CI: 1.00-1.009, P = 0.07). Conclusions: Perhaps due to availability of concurrent care, VHA patients received less aggressive care at EOL as compared to SM patients. At the regional level, greater hospice use among Medicare beneficiaries was significantly associated with reduced AC within the VHA.