Hospice Quality Research Articles

Private Equity Acquisitions Of Hospices Are Increasing; Ownership Remains Opaque.

Private equity ownership across the US health care system is rapidly increasing, yet ownership structures are complex and opaque. We used an economic data set tracking mergers and acquisitions linked to Medicare data to identify private equity hospice acquisitions. Given the influence of for-profit ownership on hospice quality, transparent data on private equity investment are fundamental to ensuring high-quality end-of-life care.

Quality of Care during the COVID-19 Pandemic: A Qualitative Exploration of Bereaved Caregivers' Experiences at a Hospice Residence.

Background: An essential component of residential hospice care is the provision of high quality palliative care. The perspectives of quality of care from palliative care patients and bereaved caregivers have increasingly been studied to guide quality improvements. Aim: The study aimed to explore the experiences and perceptions of bereaved caregivers of patients who died in residential hospice during the coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19) pandemic to determine perceptions of quality of care, caregiver grief and bereavement, and the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic. Design: Qualitative exploratory study using secure, web-based semistructured interviews. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis. Setting/Participants: A total of 15 bereaved caregiver participants were recruited from two residential hospice sites in Ottawa, Ontario. Results: Participants identified several factors that impacted the quality of care in residential hospice, including the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic itself. The findings are presented in three main themes: (1) quality of residential hospice end-of-life care; (2) caregiver perceptions of their grief and bereavement; and (3) impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospice quality of care and caregiver bereavement. Conclusions: The COVID-19 pandemic had a significant impact on the patient and caregivers experience of hospice, including perception of quality of care and caregiver experience of grief and bereavement.

Measurement Invariance of the Hospice Quality of Life Index-14 in Lung Cancer and Nonlung Cancer Patients Admitted to Hospice.

Background and Purpose: Establishing measurement invariance (MI) is important in the questionnaire validation process. This study examined the MI of the Hospice Quality of Life Index-14 (HQLI-14) when comparing hospice patients with lung cancer and those with non-lung cancers. Methods: The HQLI-14 contains 14 items to measure multidimensional concepts of quality of life. A series of confirmatory factor analyses were performed to test configural, metric, and scalar invariance. Results: The MI of the HQLI-14 was supported by increasing equality constraints on item parameters between groups. Although the configural and metric invariances were both supported, one item regarding breathlessness was noninvariant between the groups with lung and nonlung cancers. Conclusions: The HQLI-14 shows early evidence of meeting the requirements for configural, metric, and partial scalar invariance. It may be used to make meaningful comparisons between patients with lung cancer and nonlung cancers.

Caregiver and Employee Experience Among Big Hospices-Ranking of the Largest US Hospices by Three Quality Indicators.

Several studies chronicle profit-making negatively impacting US hospice care quality. However, no study has reported on caregiver satisfaction expressed online by hospice. Assess the relationship between online caregiver sentiment, market share, profit status, and Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) scores among the 50 largest US hospices. Retrospective mixed methods of sentiment and multivariate regression analysis. Data sources were online caregiver reviews, provider CAHPS hospice survey data. Being a larger, for-profit predicted diminished caregiver and employee satisfaction. Caregiver Sentiment and CAHPS Composite were so highly associated (r = .862, P < .001), that they are converging on overall caregiver satisfaction. With large effect, CAHPS Star Rating was significantly higher than Review Star Rating. For-profits had significantly higher overall Emotional Intensity than non-profit hospices, again with large effect. Caregiver Sentiment, Review Star Rating, and Glassdoor Composite each predicted CAHPS Composite. Lack of staffing was more frequent among for-profits (13%) than non-profits (6%). Out-of-scope expectations prevalence was 9%. Caregiver and employees had better experiences with non-profits than for-profits. Anger and frustration was expressed toward large, for-profit providers more focused on admissions, profiteering, and paying dividends than actual care. The CAHPS appears to draw more satisfied caregivers. Whereas, online reviewing provides open-ended, real-time voicing of care quality concerns. Even with distinct methods, CAHPS survey and review sentiment analysis converge on caregiver satisfaction, yet CAHPS paints a much rosier picture of hospice quality than online reviews. Future research should explore sentiments by topic and hospice to increase customer advocacy.

Change in U.S. Hospice Quality Measure Scores During the COVID-19 Pandemic and Correlation With Exposure to State Policies for Protection of Older Adults.

To limit spread of COVID-19, many U.S. states adopted policies affecting access to older adults, including those in hospice. This study aimed to assess differences in hospice quality measures from before COVID-19 to during the COVID-19 pandemic and to evaluate for any correlation with these state policies. Scores (treatment preferences, believes/values, pain screening and assessment, dyspnea screening and treatment, bowel regimen, and a composite score) and Denominators (population being measured) for CMS's Hospice Item Set were compared using a paired t-test between a pre-pandemic period (01/2019-12/2019) and a period early in the pandemic in the U.S (7/2020-6/2021). Correlations between HIS composite scores from 9 months (7/2020-3/2021) and exposure to state policies for older adult protection, and covariates, were assessed by linear regression. Data were collected on 3535 hospices. Seven of 8 HIS scores increased during the pandemic period. The remaining score was unchanged. All Denominators decreased. There was negative correlation between composite score (7/2020-3/2021) and exposure to state policies for protecting older adults. There were positive correlations with hospice age, for-profit status, 2019 average daily census, and 2019 composite score. Most HIS scores increased during this COVID-19 pandemic period; there was a small, significant negative correlation between the composite quality score and exposure to state policies for older adult protection. Further research is needed to better understand the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on hospice care in the U.S. and globally, and future additions in quality reporting may facilitate real-time assessment during future public health emergencies.

Development of a model and method for hospice quality assessment from natural language processing (NLP) analysis of online caregiver reviews.

With a fraction of hospices having their Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) scores on Hospice Compare, a significant reservoir of hospice quality data remains in online caregiver reviews. The purpose of this study was to develop a method and model of hospice quality assessment from caregiver reviews using Watson's carative model. Retrospective mixed methods of pilot qualitative thematic analysis and sentiment analysis using NLP of Google and Yelp caregiver reviews between 2013 and 2023. We employed stratified sampling, weighted according to hospice size, to emulate the daily census of enrollees across the United States. Sentiment analysis was performed (n=3393) using Google NLP. Two themes with the highest prevalence had moderately positive sentiments (S): Caring staff (+.47) and Care quality, comfort and cleanliness (+.41). Other positive sentiment scores with high prevalence were Gratitude and thanks (+.81), "Treating the patient with respect" (+.54), and "Emotional, spiritual, bereavement support" (+.60). Lowest sentiment scores were "Insurance, administrative or billing" (-.37), "Lack of staffing" (-.32), and "Communication with the family" (-.01). In the developed quality model, caregivers recommended hospices with caring staff, providing quality care, responsive to requests, and offering family support, including bereavement care. All ten Watson's carative factors and all eight CAHPS measures were presented in the discovered review themes of the quality model. Close-ended CAHPS scores and open-ended online reviews have substantial conceptual overlap and complementary insights. Future hospice quality research should explore caregiver expectations and compare review themes by profit status.

Overall US Hospice Quality According to Decedent Caregivers-Natural Language Processing and Sentiment Analysis of 3389 Online Caregiver Reviews.

Objectives: With an untapped quality resource in online hospice reviews, study aims were exploring hospice caregiver experiences and assessing their expectations of the hospice Medicare benefit. Methods: Topical and sentiment analysis was conducted using natural language processing (NLP) of Google and Yelp caregiver reviews (n = 3393) between 2013-2023 using Google NLP. Stratified sampling weighted by hospice size to approximate the daily census of US hospice enrollees. Results: Overall caregiver sentiment of hospice care was neutral (S = .14). Therapeutic, achievable expectations and misperceptions, unachievable expectations were, respectively, the most and least prevalent domains. Four topics with the highest prevalence, all had moderately positive sentiments: caring staff, staff professionalism and knowledge; emotional, spiritual, bereavement support; and responsive, timely or helpful. Lowest sentiments scores were lack of staffing; promises made, but not kept, pain, symptoms and medications; sped-up death, hasted, or sedated; and money, staff motivations. Significance of Results: Caregivers overall rating of hospice was neutral, largely due to moderate sentiment on achievable expectations in two-thirds of reviews mixed with unachievable expectations in one-sixth of reviews. Hospice caregivers were most likely to recommend hospices with caring staff, providing quality care, responsive to requests, and offering family support. Lack of staff, inadequate pain-symptom management were the two biggest barriers to hospice quality. All eight CAHPS measures were found in the discovered review topics. Close-ended CAHPS scores and open-ended online reviews have complementary insights. Future research should explore associations between CAHPS and review insights.

The impact on hospice quality after initiation of an internal palliative care program by a community oncology practice.

e18720 Background: Virginia Cancer Institute (VCI) participated in the Oncology Care Model (OCM) with an aim to improve cancer care quality. As part of OCM, VCI started a palliative care program (PC) in 2016 by partnering with a local palliative care provider. In September 2020, VCI overhauled PC moving away from outside provider (OPC) and created an internal program (IPC). Both programs managed care from VCI oncologist referrals to PC until patient’s hospice start or practice discharge. This study describes the methods or changes from OPC to IPC and the resulting difference in hospice quality measure performance. Methods: Under OPC, services were provided half-day per week in office from a PC nurse practitioner (NP). IPC changed to a PC NP employed by VCI who provided services 5 days per week with office, hospital and telemedicine options. IPC added multiple PC education, communication touchpoints with oncologists and practice staff. IPC provided reminders to VCI physician teams about the availability of in-house PC services and the benefits of early engagement. Along with the oncologists, IPC continued goals of care discussions with patients and family to ensure patients’ desires and needs were met. OPC hospice referrals from PC went to a single hospice group. IPC added a network of multiple hospice groups. Retrospective claims review of OCM performance periods (PP) 1-8 (Jul 2016 – Dec 2020) for OPC and OCM PP 9-10 (Jul 2020 – Dec 2021) for IPC was performed and excluded patients with incomplete hospice claims. Primary endpoint was difference between OPC and IPC in OCM-3 quality: proportion of OCM patients who died during their episode with 3 or more days hospice immediately prior to death. Secondary endpoint was the difference in proportions of OPC and IPC with any hospice length of stay. Z-test between 2 proportions was used to calculate significance. Results: There were 871 and 197 OCM-3 eligible patients reviewed from OPC and IPC respectively. OCM-3 quality performance was 48.1% OPC and 62.4% IPC, p &lt; 0.01. Any hospice performance was 65.8% OPC and 78.7% IPC, p &lt; 0.01. The OCM-3 goal throughout for maximum quality score was 60%. Performance improvement started in the first IPC period (PP9) and was greater in the second IPC period (PP10). Conclusions: Results showed a significant improvement in OCM performance measures between OPC and IPC over a short period of 10 months. After IPC, practice met the OCM-3 goal. The data is limited to latest available OCM reconciliation claims and may be refreshed when additional OCM data is released. Although specific cause and effect was not assessed, the authors attribute quality improvement to the implementation of an internal, full-time PC NP. This expanded PC access for patients and increased communication between patients and providers. We believe that, as a result, the quality of care delivery improved.

Associations Between Certificate of Need Policies and Hospice Quality Outcomes.

Certificate of need (CON) laws are state-based regulations requiring approval of new healthcare entities and capital expenditures. Varying by state, these regulations impact hospices in 14 states and DC, with several states re-examining provisions. This cross-sectional study examined the association of CON status on hospice quality outcomes using the hospice item set metric (HIS). Data from the February 2022 Medicare Hospice Provider and General Information reports of 4870 US hospices were used to compare group means of the 8 HIS measures across CON status. Multiple regression analysis was used to predict HIS outcomes by CON status while controlling for ownership and size. Approximately 86% of hospices are in states without a hospice CON provision. The unadjusted mean HIS scores for all measures were higher in CON states (M range 94.40-99.59) than Non-CON (M range 90.50-99.53) with significant differences in all except treatment preferences. In the adjusted model, linear regression analyses showed hospice CON states had significantly higher HIS ratings than those from Non-CON states for beliefs and values addressed (β = .05, P = .009), pain assessment (β = .05, P = .009), dyspnea treatment (β = .08, P < .001) and the composite measure (β = .09, P < .001). Treatment preferences, pain screening, dyspnea screening, and opioid bowel treatment were not statistically significant (P > .05). The study suggests that CON regulations may have a modest, but beneficial impact on hospice-reported quality outcomes, particularly for small and medium-sized hospices. Further research is needed to explore other factors that contribute to HIS outcomes.

Hospice Quality, Race, and Disenrollment in Hospice Enrollees With Dementia.

Background: Racial and ethnic minoritized people with dementia (PWD) are at high risk of disenrollment from hospice, yet little is known about the relationship between hospice quality and racial disparities in disenrollment among PWD. Objective: To assess the association between race and disenrollment between and within hospice quality categories in PWD. Design/Setting/Subjects: Retrospective cohort study of 100% Medicare beneficiaries 65+ enrolled in hospice with a principal diagnosis of dementia, July 2012-December 2017. Race and ethnicity (White/Black/Hispanic/Asian and Pacific Islander [AAPI]) was assessed with the Research Triangle Institute (RTI) algorithm. Hospice quality was assessed with the publicly-available Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) survey item on overall hospice rating, including a category for hospices exempt from public reporting (unrated). Results: The sample included 673,102 PWD (mean age 86, 66% female, 85% White, 7.3% Black, 6.3% Hispanic, 1.6% AAPI) enrolled in 4371 hospices nationwide. Likelihood of disenrollment was higher in hospices in the lowest quartile of quality ratings (vs. highest quartile) for both White (adjusted odds ratio [AOR] 1.12 [95% confidence interval 1.06-1.19]) and minoritized PWD (AOR range 1.2-1.3) and was substantially higher in unrated hospices (AOR range 1.8-2.0). Within both low- and high-quality hospices, minoritized PWD were more likely to be disenrolled compared with White PWD (AOR range 1.18-1.45). Conclusions: Hospice quality predicts disenrollment, but does not fully explain disparities in disenrollment for minoritized PWD. Efforts to improve racial equity in hospice should focus both on increasing equity in access to high-quality hospices and improving care for racial minoritized PWD in all hospices.

Investigating trial feasibility of music care in hospice and palliative care

The nature of hospice and palliative care (HPC) settings necessitates supporting residents’ ever-changing needs and responding to unforeseeable situations – as such, this unpredictability has historically challenged the collection of high-quality data in such settings. Through a feedback consensus approach, this pilot study sought to determine the feasibility of implementing a clinical trial aiming to understand the impact of a recorded music care intervention on quality of life (QoL) in HPC settings. Four participants with a palliative performance scale (PPS) score of ≥ 40 were recruited. Pre-developed music care albums designed for HPC were used as an intervention for a minimum duration of 30-minutes. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale, Hospice Quality of Life Index, and State-Trait Anxiety Inventory were implemented to mirror a future randomised controlled trial (RCT) design but were not statistically interpreted in this pilot study. Data collectors also recorded participants’ and care providers’ perspectives. Through feedback from participants, healthcare professionals, and music care experts, the intervention duration was reduced to a minimum of 15-minutes, and the PPS inclusion criteria requirement was eliminated. The number of outcome measures was reduced from three to one to mitigate participant burnout. Finally, participants indicated that the recorded music intervention was therapeutic, therefore justifying further study of QoL outcome measures. Implementing a second pilot to validate the changes to the RCT study protocol will be a critical step in the research process, although the results of this study can be considered by researchers conducting RCTs in HPC to inform best practices.

Hospice Quality, Race, and Disenrollment in Hospice Enrollees with Dementia (FR202A)

Hospice Quality, Race, and Disenrollment in Hospice Enrollees with Dementia (FR202A)

Association of Hospice Profit Status With Family Caregivers’ Reported Care Experiences

Expansive growth in the US hospice market has been driven almost exclusively by an increase in for-profit hospices. Prior research found that, in contrast to not-for-profit hospices, for-profit hospices focus on delivering care to patients in nursing homes, provide fewer nursing visits, and use less skilled staff. However, prior studies have not reported on the associations of these differences in care patterns with hospice care quality. Patient- and family-centeredness is a core element of hospice care quality that is measured through surveys of care experiences. To examine whether differences in profit status are associated with family caregivers' reports of hospice care experiences and assess factors that may be associated with observed differences in care experiences by profit status. Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Hospice Survey data from 653 208 caregiver respondents, reflecting care received from 3107 hospices between April 2017 and March 2019, were used for a cross-sectional examination of hospice care experiences by profit status. Data analysis was performed from January 2020 to November 2022. Outcomes were case-mix-adjusted and mode-adjusted top-box scores for 8 measures of hospice care experiences, including communication, timely care, symptom management, and emotional and religious support, as well as a summary score averaging across measures. Linear regression examined the association between profit status and hospice-level scores, adjusting for other organizational and structural hospice characteristics. There were 906 not-for-profit and 1761 for-profit hospices with mean (SD) time in operation of 25.7 (7.8) years and 13.8 (8.0) years, respectively. Mean (SD) decedent age at death was 82.8 (2.3) years, similar for not-for-profit and for-profit hospices. The mean proportion of patients who were Black, Hispanic, and White was 4.9%, 0.9%, and 91.4% for not-for-profit hospices and 9.0%, 2.2%, and 85.4% for for-profit hospices, respectively. Family caregivers reported worse care experiences at for-profit hospices than at not-for-profit hospices for all measures. Significant differences in average hospice performance by profit status remained after adjusting for hospice characteristics. However, for-profit hospice performance varied, with 548 of 1761 (31.1%) for-profit hospices scoring 3 or more points below the national hospice average of overall performance and 386 of 1761 (21.9%) scoring 3 or more points above the average. In contrast, only 113 of 906 (12.5%) not-for-profit hospices scored 3 or more points below the average, and 305 of 906 (33.7%) scored 3 or more points above the average. In this cross-sectional study of CAHPS Hospice Survey data, caregivers of patients receiving hospice care reported substantially worse care experiences in for-profit than in not-for-profit hospices; however, there was variation in reported experiences among both types of hospices. Public reporting of hospice quality is important.

Are Hospice Google Ratings Correlated With Patient Experience Scores? Evidence from a National Hospice Study.

Background: Choosing hospice care for your loved ones is often challenging. Online ratings such as Google rating has become a go-to source for most consumers. The Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Survey for Hospice also provides quality information about hospice care to help patients and their families make decisions. Aim: To evaluate the perceived usefulness of publicly reported hospice quality indicators and compare hospice Google ratings with hospice CAHPS scores. Methods: A cross-sectional observational study was performed to test the relationship between Google ratings and CAHPS measures in 2020. We conducted descriptive statistics for all variables. Multivariate regressions were used to assess the relationship between Google ratings and the CAHPS scores of the sample. Results: Among our sample of 1,956 hospices, the average Google rating was 4.2 out of 5 stars. CAHPS score means ranged from 75 (Help for pain and symptoms) to 90 (Treating patients with respect) out of 100. Hospice Google ratings were highly correlated with hospice CAHPS scores. For-profit and chain-affiliated hospices reported lower CAHPS scores. Hospice operational time was positively associated with CAHPS scores. The percentage of minority residents in the community and residents' educational level was negatively associated with CAHPS scores. Conclusions: Hospice Google ratings were highly correlated with patients' and families' experience scores as measured by the CAHPS survey. Consumers can use information from both resources in making decisions about hospice care.

Examining the Psychometric Properties of the Taiwanese Version of the Hospice Quality of Life Index.

Quality of life is an important outcome for people with cancer throughout their cancer trajectory. Having a valid and reliable instrument to measure the quality of life is critical. This cross-sectional study examined the psychometric properties of the Taiwanese version of the Hospice Quality of Life Index among patients with advanced cancer in Taiwan. There were 3 phases: (1) translation of the Hospice Quality of Life Index from English to Mandarin, (2) pilot testing among 30 targeted participants, and (3) field testing to examine validity and reliability. The results of confirmatory factor analysis indicated that the original factor structure of the Hospice Quality of Life Index did not fit the data. After 5 items were deleted from the original questionnaire, principal factor extraction with oblique rotation for exploratory factor analysis yielded 3 subscales: Social/Spiritual Well-Being, Psychological Well-Being, and Functional/Physiological Well-Being. For convergent validity, the small to moderate strength of associations showed shared variance with the Memorial Symptom Assessment Scale. The internal consistency was supported by Cronbach α ranging from 0.77 to 0.86. This study shows early evidence that the quality of life of people with advanced cancer can be appropriately assessed by the Taiwanese Hospice Quality of Life Index.

Hospice Glassdoor and CAHPS® Scores-Glassdoor Scores and Hospice Financial Characteristics Predict Hospice Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems Scores.

Recent public data transparency on both decedent caregiver satisfaction and employee satisfaction is impacting the three most essential needs of any hospice, admitting hospice enrollees, attracting hospice professionals and delivering on quality. Explore the relationship between Glassdoor hospice employee recommendation data, hospice financial characteristics, and Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) scores among the 50 largest US hospices. Retrospective data with multivariate regression analysis. Provider CAHPS hospice survey data from 2019-2020 and Glassdoor employee recommendation data. Glassdoor Composite and CAHPS Composite were positively correlated (r = .469, p < .01). Glassdoor scores, profit status, and acquisition status predicted Hospice CAHPS scores and explained 44% of the variation in CAHPS Composite. Being a large, for-profit hospice in acquisition status each predicted lower CAHPS scores. Non-profit hospices had significantly higher Glassdoor and CAHPS scores than for-profit hospices. CAHPS Composite and CAHPS Star Rating have potential as global indicators to inform customers of a given hospice's overall quality on the Hospice Compare website of CMS. Hospice leaders seeking improvements in CAHPS scores are encouraged to seek feedback on whether their own employees would recommend their hospice to a friend. Communication and responsiveness were the strongest indicators of overall hospice quality. Skelton hospice staffing models must give way to realistic models that value company culture and employee satisfaction. Hospice quality and hospice profits are not necessarily mutually exclusive. Future research should explore the difference in themes emerging from positive and negative online caregiver reviews.

Construction and Performance of the Hospice Care Index Claims-Based Quality Measure

As part of the Medicare Hospice Benefit (MHB), hospices submit claims containing information that allows policy makers to assess hospice quality, help policy makers improve the MHB, and increase patients’ experiences of care. We examine ten different hospice quality indicators related to the provision of services and patterns of live discharge. We calculated indicators using 100% Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) claims from October 1, 2018 through September 30, 2019. A hospice’s total score among all ten indicators is referred to as their Hospice Care Index (HCI), with a possible high score of 10. We examined all hospices with at least 20 discharges. After exclusion, we examined 4,155 hospices representing 1,562,003 beneficiaries. Most hospices earn a high HCI score: over 85% of hospices had scores of eight or more. At the same time, there were some lower scoring hospices: one in ten hospices scored seven on the index, and the remaining 4.9% scored six or lower. We find that on average hospices with higher HCI scores have better Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) Hospice ratings. Among hospices with a score of ten, 85.1% of caregivers reported they would definitely recommend the hospice vs. 82.9% of caregivers of patients receiving treatment from hospices with a score of seven or less. Using the HCI, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and hospice patient caregivers can assess hospices across a broad set of indicators. Policymakers and hospices should monitor these ten indicators to understand their performance relative to peers.

가정형 호스피스·완화의료에서 인생 회고 기법을 활용한 노래 중심 음악치료가 환자와 주 돌봄 가족의 삶의 질과 가족 관계에 미치는 영향

본 연구는 인생 회고 기법을 활용한 노래 중심 음악치료가 가정형 호스피스·완화의료 서비스를 받고 있는 환자와 주 돌봄 가족의 삶의 질과 가족 관계에 미치는 영향을 규명하기 위해 실시하였다. 연구 대상은 I광역 시 B구 C대학병원의 가정형 호스피스 완화의료 서비스 이용 가족 중 자발적으로 연구 참여에 동의한 환자와 주 돌봄 가족 1인 10쌍으로 총 20명이었다. 사전 검사 후, 지나온 삶을 회고하고 지나온 과거를 재경험하며 자신의 삶에 가치를 부여하도록 유도하는 인생 회고 기법을 활용한 노래 중심 음악치료 프로그램을 주 2회 씩 2주간 총 4회기 중재하고, 사후 검사를 시행하였다. 대상자들의 변화를 측정하기 위해 ‘호스피스 암 환자 의 삶의 질 측정 도구(Hospice Quality of Life Scale: HQLS)’, ‘삶의 질 측정 도구(Quality of Life: QOL)’ 그리고 ‘가족 관계의 질 측정 도구(Quality of Relationship between caregiver and patient)’를 사용하였다. 통계 분석 결과, 가정형 호스피스·완화의료 환자(Z=-2.805, p<01)와 주 돌봄 가족(Z=-2.701, p<.01)의 삶의 질에 유의미한 향상이 나타났으며, 가족 관계의 질(Z=-2.803, p<.01) 역시 통계적으로 유의미하게 증진되었다. 이러한 결과들은 총체적인 돌봄에 의한 환자와 가족의 삶의 질 향상이라는 호스피스·완화의료 의 목적과 목표에 부합하는 것으로, 가정형 호스피스·완화의료 환자와 주 돌봄 가족의 삶의 질과 가족 관계의 질 향상을 위한 음악치료 적용의 필요성을 시사한다.

Hospice Inpatient Services Provision, Utilization, and Financial Performance

Background: Hospice performance is an overlooked area in the health care field due to the nature of hospice care and the infrequent hospice quality inspection. Purpose: The objective of this study is to explain differences in the financial performance of hospices with regard to hospice inpatient services provision when considering the average length of stay (LOS) in the relationship. Methodology/Approach: A longitudinal secondary data set (2009 to 2013) was merged from three sources: (a) Hospice Cost Reports from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS), (b) the Provider of Services (POS) files, and (c) the Area Health Resources Files (AHRF). The dependent variable in this study was hospice financial performance measured by total margin (TM) and return on assets (ROA). The independent variable was hospice inpatient services’ offering. Mixed effects regression models were used in the multivariate regression analyses. The mediation effect of hospice average LOS in the relationship between hospice inpatient services’ provision and two financial performance measures was also tested. Results: The presence of hospice inpatient services was negatively related to average LOS (ß =-0.050; p<0.01), total margin (TM) (ß =-0.028; p<0.01), and return on assets (ROA) (ß =-0.059; p<0.01). However, average LOS was positively associated with TM (ß =0.077; p<0.01) and ROA (ß =0.177; p<0.01). The relationship between hospice inpatient services’ offering and financial performance was partially mediated by hospice average LOS. Conclusion: Hospice inpatient services provision and average LOS were associated with financial performance. Practice Implications: Offering the inpatient services to patients decreased average LOS and lowered the hospices’ overall profitability. Hospice agencies need to seek strategies to maintain their financial sustainability but not to compromise their quality of services.

Engaging Hospices in Quality Measurement and Improvement: Early Experiences of a Large Integrated Health Care System

The quality of hospice care remains highly variable in the U.S. Patients, providers, and health care systems lack a comprehensive method of measuring the quality of care provided by an individual hospice. Partners HealthCare sought to assess hospice quality based on objective and quantitative criteria obtained directly from hospices and through public reporting. Here, we describe the process of creating and administering this assessment and the initial creation of a collaborative network with high-quality hospices.A multidisciplinary advisory council developed criteria and a scoring system, focusing on organizational information (e.g., nursing turnover), clinical care quality indicators (e.g., visit hours before death), and training (e.g., medical director certification) and satisfaction (e.g., patient and family surveys). All Medicare-certified hospices in good standing in Massachusetts were eligible to participate in a request for information (RFI) process. We blinded data before scoring and invited hospices scoring above the 15th percentile to join the initial collaborative.Of 72 eligible hospices, most (53%) responded to the RFI, and 32% (n = 23) submitted completed surveys. Hospices could receive up to 23.75 points, and scores ranged from 2.25 to 19.5. The median score was 13.62 (interquartile range 10.5–16.75). For hospices scoring above the 15th percentile (n = 19), scores ranged from 10.0 to 19.5 (median 14).The hospice RFI process is one health care system's attempt to evaluate hospice quality. Further research will determine whether the scoring system proves to be a sensitive, specific, and reproducible measure of hospice quality, and whether the collaborative can foster quality improvement over time.