Which medicare advantage enrollees are at highest one-year mortality risk?

BACKGROUND: While a number of tools exist to predict mortality among older adults, less research has described the characteristics of Medicare Advantage (MA) enrollees at higher risk for 1 year mortality. OBJECTIVES: To describe the characteristics of MA enrollees at higher mortality risk using patient survey data. RESEARCH DESIGN: Retrospective cohort. SUBJECTS: MA enrollees completing the 2019 MA Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) Survey. MEASURES: Linked demographic, health, and mortality data from a sample of MA enrollees were used to predict 1-year mortality risk and describe enrollee characteristics across levels of predicted mortality risk. RESULTS: The mortality model had a 0.80 c-statistic. Mortality risks were skewed: 6 % of enrollees had a ≥ 10 % 1-year mortality risk, while 45 % of enrollees had 1 % to < 5 % 1-year mortality risk. Among the high-risk (≥10 %) group, 47 % were age 85+ versus 12 % among those with mortality risk <5 %. 79 % were in fair or poor self-rated health versus 29 % among those with mortality risk of <5 %. 71 % reported needing urgent care in the prior 6 months versus 40 % among those with a mortality risk of 1 to<5 %. CONCLUSIONS: Relatively few older adults enrolled in MA are at high 1-year mortality risk. Nonetheless, MA enrollees over age 85, in fair or poor health, or with recent urgent care needs are far more likely to be in a high mortality risk group.

Health system implementation of the PROMIS Cognitive Function Screener in the Medicare Annual Wellness Visit: framing as abilities versus concerns.

BACKGROUND: Cognitive assessment is a required component of the Medicare Annual Wellness Visit (AWV). In this prospective study, we evaluated acceptability and usefulness of a patient-reported outcome measure (the PROMIS® Cognitive Function Screener, or PRO-CS) to screen for cognitive impairment during the AWV. We compared two versions of the PRO-CS: Abilities and Concerns. METHODS: We developed PRO-CS Abilities and PRO-CS Concerns using items from the PROMIS Cognitive Function item banks. We partnered with a large health system in Pennsylvania to implement an electronic health record (EHR)-integrated version of the 4-item PRO-CS into their AWV workflow. PRO-CS Abilities was implemented in June 2022 and then replaced with PRO-CS Concerns in October 2022. We used EHR data to evaluate scores on Abilities versus Concerns and their association with patient characteristics. We gathered feedback from providers on experiences with the PRO-CS and conducted cognitive interviews with patients to evaluate their preferences for Abilities versus Concerns. RESULTS: Between June 2022 and January 2023, 3,088 patients completed PRO-CS Abilities and 2,614 patients completed PRO-CS Concerns. Mean T-scores for Abilities (54.8) were slightly higher (indicating better cognition) than for Concerns (52.6). 10% of scores on Abilities and 13% of scores on Concerns indicated concern for cognitive impairment (T-score < 45). Both Abilities and Concerns were associated with clinical characteristics as hypothesized, with lower scores for patients with cognitive impairment diagnoses and those requiring assistance with instrumental activities of daily living. Abilities and Concerns had similar negative correlations with depression (r= -0.31 versus r= -0.33) and anxiety (r= -0.28 for both), while Abilities had a slightly stronger positive correlation with self-rated health (r = 0.34 versus r = 0.28). In interviews, providers commented that the PRO-CS could be useful to facilitate conversations about cognition, though several providers noted potential limitations of patient self-report. Feedback from patients indicated a preference for PRO-CS Concerns. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings suggest potential utility of the PRO-CS for cognitive screening in the Medicare AWV. PRO-CS Abilities and Concerns had similar associations with patient clinical characteristics, but the Concerns version was more acceptable to patients.

Advancing the Care Experience for patients receiving Palliative care as they Transition from hospital to Home (ACEPATH): Codesigning an intervention to improve patient and family caregiver experiences.

BACKGROUND: Returning home from the hospital for palliative-focused care is a common transition, but the process can be emotionally distressing and logistically challenging for patients and caregivers. While interventions exist to aid in the transition, none have been developed in partnership with patients and caregivers. OBJECTIVE: To undergo the initial stages of codesign to create an intervention (Advancing the Care Experience for patients receiving Palliative care as they Transition from hospital to Home [ACEPATH]) to improve the experience of hospital-to-home transitions for adult patients receiving palliative care and their caregiver(s). METHODS: The codesign process consisted of (1) the development of codesign workshop (CDW) materials to communicate key findings from prior research to CDW participants; (2) CDWs with patients, caregivers and healthcare providers (HCPs); and (3) low-fidelity prototype testing to review CDW outputs and develop low-fidelity prototypes of interventions. HCPs provided feedback on the viability of low-fidelity prototypes. RESULTS: Three patients, seven caregivers and five HCPs participated in eight CDWs from July 2022 to March 2023. CDWs resulted in four intervention prototypes: a checklist, quick reference sheets, a patient/caregiver workbook and a transition navigator role. Outputs from CDWs included descriptions of interventions and measures of success. In April 2023, the four prototypes were presented in four low-fidelity prototype sessions to 20 HCPs. Participants in the low-fidelity prototype sessions provided feedback on what the interventions could look like, what problems the interventions were trying to solve and concerns about the interventions. CONCLUSION: Insights gained from this codesign work will inform high-fidelity prototype testing and the eventual implementation and evaluation of an ACEPATH intervention that aims to improve hospital-to-home transitions for patients receiving a palliative approach to care. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients and caregivers with lived experience attended CDWs aimed at designing an intervention to improve the transition from hospital to home. Their direct involvement aligns the intervention with patients' and caregivers' needs when transitioning from hospital to home. Furthermore, four patient/caregiver advisors were engaged throughout the project (from grant writing through to manuscript writing) to ensure all stages were patient- and caregiver-centred.

Selecting outcomes for pragmatic clinical trials in dementia care: The IMPACT Collaboratory iLibrary.

BACKGROUND: Many interventions improve care and outcomes for people with Alzheimer's Disease and related dementias (ADRD), yet are never disseminated. Pragmatic trials facilitate the adoption and dissemination of best practices, but gaps in pragmatic outcome measurement are a critical obstacle. Our objectives are (1) to describe the development and structure of the IMbedded Pragmatic ADRD Clinical Trials Collaboratory (IMPACT) iLibrary of potential outcome measures for ADRD pragmatic trials, and (2) to assess their pragmatic characteristics. METHODS: We identified potential outcome measures from several sources: a database of administrative and clinical outcome measures from ADRD clinical trials registered in ClinicalTrials.gov, published reviews, and IMPACT pilot pragmatic trial outcome measures. The iLibrary reports (a) number of items, (b) completion time, (c) readability for diverse populations, (d) cost or copyright barriers to use, (e) method of administration, (f) assessor training burden, and (g) feasibility of data capture and interpretation in routine care; a summary of pragmatic characteristics of each outcome measure (high, moderate, low); items or descriptions of items; and links to primary citations regarding development or psychometric properties. RESULTS: We included 140 outcome measures in the iLibrary: 66 administrative (100% were pragmatic) and 74 clinical (52% were pragmatic). The most commonly addressed outcome domains from administrative assessments included physical function, quality of care or communication concerns, and psychological symptoms or distress behaviors. The most commonly addressed outcome domains from clinical assessments were psychological symptoms or distress behaviors, physical function, cognitive function, and health-related quality of life. CONCLUSIONS: Pragmatic outcome measures are brief, meaningful to diverse populations, easily scored and interpreted by clinicians, and available in electronic format for analysis. The iLibrary can facilitate the selection of measures for a wide range of outcomes relevant to people with ADRD and their care partners.

Concurrent Hospice and Dialysis Care: Considerations for Implementation.

IMPORTANCE: Hospice positively impacts care at the end of life for patients and their families. However, compared to the general Medicare population, patients on dialysis are half as likely to receive hospice. Concurrent hospice and dialysis care offers an opportunity to improve care for people living with end-stage kidney disease (ESKD). OBJECTIVE: We sought to (1) develop a conceptual model of the Program and (2) identify key components, resources, and considerations for further implementation. DESIGN: We conducted a template analysis of qualitative interviews and convened a community advisory panel (CAP) to get feedback on current concurrent care design and considerations for dissemination and implementation. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-nine patients with late-stage chronic kidney disease (CKD), family caregivers, bereaved family caregivers, hospice clinicians, nephrology clinicians, administrators, and policy experts participated in interviews. A purposive subset of 19 interviewees composed the CAP. MAIN MEASURES: Qualitative feedback on concurrent care design refinements, implementation, and resources. KEY RESULTS: Participants identified four themes that define an effective model of concurrent hospice and dialysis: it requires (1) timely goals-of-care conversations and (2) an interdisciplinary approach; (3) clear guidelines ensure smooth transitions for patients and families; and (4) hospice payment policy must support concurrent care. CAP participants provided feedback on the phases of an effective model of concurrent hospice and dialysis, and resources, including written and interactive educational materials, communication tools, workflow processes, and order sets. CONCLUSIONS: We developed a conceptual model for concurrent hospice and dialysis care and a corresponding resource list. In addition to policy changes, clinical implementation and educational resources can facilitate scalable and equitable dissemination of concurrent care. Concurrent hospice and dialysis care must be systematically evaluated via a hybrid implementation-effectiveness trial that includes the resources outlined herein, based on our conceptual model of concurrent care delivery.

Electronic health record (EHR)-based PROMIS measures among neurology clinic decedents and survivors: a retrospective cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: In addition to their standard use to assess real-time symptom burden, patient-reported outcomes (PROs), such as the Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS), measures offer a potential opportunity to understand when patients are experiencing meaningful clinical decline. If PROs can be used to assess decline, such information can be used for informing medical decision making and determining patient-centered treatment pathways. We sought to use clinically implemented PROMIS measures to retrospectively characterize the final PROMIS report among all patients who completed at least one PROMIS assessment from December 2017-March 2020 in one large health system, stratified by decedents vs. survivors. We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of decedents (N = 1,499) who received care from outpatient neurology clinical practice within a single, large health system as part of usual care. We also compared decedents to survivors (360 + days before death; N = 49,602) on PROMIS domains and PROMIS-Preference (PROPr) score, along with demographics and clinical characteristics. We used electronic health record (EHR) data with built-in PROMIS measures. Linear regressions assessed differences in PROMIS domains and aggregate PROPr score by days before death of the final PROMIS completion for each patient. RESULTS: Among decedents in our sample, in multivariable regression, only fatigue (range 54.48-59.38, p < 0.0029) and physical function (range 33.22-38.38, p < 0.0001) demonstrated clinically meaningful differences across time before death. The overall PROPr score also demonstrated statistically significant difference comparing survivors (0.19) to PROPr scores obtained 0-29 days before death (0.29, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Although clinic completion of PROMIS measures was near universal, very few patients had more than one instance of PROMIS measures reported, limiting longitudinal analyses. Therefore, patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice may not yet be robust enough for incorporation in prediction models and assessment of trajectories of decline, as evidenced in these specialty clinics in one health system. PROMIS measures can be used to effectively identify symptoms and needs in real time, and robust incorporation into EHRs can improve patient-level outcomes, but further work is needed for them to offer meaningful inputs for defining patient trajectories near the end of life. Assessing symptom burden provides an opportunity to understand clinical decline, particularly as people approach the end of life. We sought to understand whether symptoms reported by patients can be used to assess decline in health. Such information can inform decision-making about care and treatments. Of eight symptoms that we assessed, patient reports of fatigue and physical function were associated with clinical decline, as was an overall score of symptom burden. Because few symptoms were associated with decline, patient-reported outcomes in clinical practice may not yet be robust enough for incorporation in prediction models and assessment of trajectories of decline.

Concurrent Care as the Next Frontier in End-of-Life Care.

Importance: Hospice care is a unique type of medical care for people near the end of life and their families, with an emphasis on providing physical and psychological symptom management, spiritual care, and family caregiver support to promote quality of life. However, many people in the US who could benefit from hospice have very short stays or do not enroll at all due to current hospice policy. Changing policy to allow for concurrent availability of disease-directed therapy and hospice care-known as concurrent care-offers an opportunity to increase hospice use and lengths of stay. Observations: Under Medicare payment policy, hospices are responsible for covering all costs related to patients' terminal conditions under a per diem rate. This payment structure has led to a de facto requirement that patients forgo costly therapies (including life-prolonging treatments or those with palliative intent) on enrollment in hospice because they are prohibitively expensive. In other countries, in Medicaid for children, and in the Veterans Health Administration in the US, there is greater flexibility in providing hospice services alongside life-prolonging care. Often paired with innovative payment models, concurrent care smooths practical, psychological, and physical care transitions when patient goals prioritize comfort. For example, allowing simultaneous receipt of hospice care and dialysis for people living with end-stage kidney disease-a group with relatively low hospice enrollment-can act as a bridge to hospice and potentially promote longer lengths of stay. Conclusions and Relevance: Medicare and health care delivery systems are increasingly testing payment and care delivery models to improve hospice use via concurrent care, offering an important opportunity for innovation to better meet the needs of people living with serious illness and their families.

Evaluating the pragmatic characteristics of advance care planning outcome measures in dementia clinical trials: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) is a process that involves discussing a person's goals, values, and preferences; it is particularly important for persons living with dementia (PLWD) given that dementia is incurable and progressive. To ensure results that will impact real-world practices, ACP outcome measures must be psychometrically strong, meaningful to key partners, and pragmatic to collect. Therefore, we conducted a scoping review of outcome measures utilized in ACP randomized controlled clinical trials (RCTs) enrolling PLWD or their care partners and evaluated their pragmatic characteristics. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE/PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science for peer-reviewed ACP RCTs enrolling PLWD or their care partners from 2011 to 2021. We abstracted characteristics of primary and secondary outcome measures, including pragmatic characteristics using an adapted Psychometric and Pragmatic Evidence Rating Scale and ACP outcome domains using the standardized ACP Outcome Framework (i.e., process, action, healthcare, or quality of care). RESULTS: We included 21 ACP RCTs. Trials included 103 outcome measures (39 primary and 64 secondary), of which 11% measured process, 14% measured action, 49% measured healthcare, and 26% measured quality of care. Twenty-four (23%) outcome measures were highly pragmatic, the majority of which (67%) reflected healthcare outcome measures. Sixty-one (59%) outcomes were assessed as highly relevant to PLWD or their care partners. Only 20% (n = 21) of outcome measures were embedded into clinical practice. Most (62%) RCTs were conducted in nursing homes, and 33% were focused PLWD with advanced stage disease. CONCLUSIONS: In RCTs testing ACP interventions to support PLWD, only 23% of outcome measures were highly pragmatic, and most of these measured healthcare utilizations. Outcome assessments were rarely integrated into the EHR during routine clinical care. New outcome measures that address the lived experience of PLWD and their care partners plus have high pragmatic characteristics are needed for embedded pragmatic clinical trials.

Association Between Shared Decision-Making During Family Meetings and Surrogates' Trust in Their ICU Physician.

BACKGROUND: Although trust is central to successful physician-family relationships in ICUs, little is known about how to promote surrogates' trust of ICU physicians in this setting. RESEARCH QUESTION: Does the conduct of family conferences and physicians' use of shared decision-making (SDM) within family conferences impact surrogates' trust in the physician? STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: A mixed-methods secondary analysis was done of a multicenter prospective cohort study of 369 surrogate decision-makers of 204 decisionally incapacitated patients at high risk of death or severe functional impairment within 13 ICUs at six US medical centers between 2008 and 2012. Surrogates completed the Abbreviated Wake Forest Physician Trust Scale (range, 5-25) before and after an audio-recorded family conference conducted within 5 days of ICU admission. We qualitatively coded transcribed conferences to determine physicians' use of five SDM behaviors: discussing surrogate's role, explaining medical condition and prognosis, providing emotional support, assessing understanding, and eliciting patient's values and preferences. Using multivariable linear regression with adjustment for clustering, we assessed whether surrogates' trust in the physician increased after the family meeting; we also examined whether the number of SDM behaviors used by physicians during the family meeting impacted trust scores. RESULTS: In adjusted models, conduct of a family meeting was associated with increased trust (average change, pre- to post family meeting: 0.91 point [95% CI, 0.4-1.4; P < .01]). Every additional element of SDM used during the family meeting, including discussing surrogate's role, providing emotional support, assessing understanding, and eliciting patient's values and preferences, was associated with a 0.37-point increase in trust (95% CI, 0.08-0.67; P = .01). If all four elements were used, trust increased by 1.48 points. Explaining medical condition or prognosis was observed in nearly every conference (98.5%) and was excluded from the final model. INTERPRETATION: The conduct of family meetings and physicians' use of SDM behaviors during meetings were both associated with increases in surrogates' trust in the treating physician.

Delivery of Active Medical Management without Dialysis through an Embedded Kidney Palliative Care Model.

Background: Patients with CKD have high symptom burden, low rates of advance care planning (ACP), and frequently receive care that is not goal concordant. Improved integration of palliative care into nephrology and access to active medical management without dialysis (AMMWD) have the potential to improve outcomes through better symptom management and enhanced shared decision making. Methods: We describe the development of a kidney palliative care (KPC) clinic and how palliative care practices are integrated within an academic nephrology clinic. We performed a retrospective electronic health record (EHR) review for patients seen in this clinic between January 2015 and February 2019 to describe key clinical activities and delivery of AMMWD. Results: A total of 165 patients were seen in the KPC clinic (139 with CKD and 26 who were already receiving dialysis). Fatigue, mobility issues, and pain were the three most prevalent symptoms (85%, 66%, 58%, respectively). Ninety-one percent of patients had a surrogate decision maker documented in the EHR; 87% of patients had a goals-of-care conversation documented in the EHR. Of the 139 patients with CKD, 67 (48%) chose AMMWD as their disease progressed. Sixty-eight percent (41 of 60) of patients who died during the study were referred to hospice. Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the integration of palliative care into nephrology can assist in identification of symptoms, lead to high rates of ACP, and provide a mechanism for patients to choose and receive AMMWD. The percentage of patients choosing AMMWD in our study suggests that increased shared decision making may lower rates of dialysis initiation in the United States. Additional prospective research and registries for assessing the effects of AMMWD have the potential to improve care for people living with CKD.

Description and Outcomes of an Innovative Concurrent Hospice-Dialysis Program.

BACKGROUND: Compared with the general Medicare population, patients with ESKD have worse quality metrics for end-of-life care, including a higher percentage experiencing hospitalizations and in-hospital deaths and a lower percentage referred to hospice. We developed a Concurrent Hospice and Dialysis Program in which patients may receive palliative dialysis alongside hospice services. The Program aims to improve access to quality end-of-life care and, ultimately, improve the experiences of patients, caregivers, and clinicians. OBJECTIVES: We sought to describe (1) the Program and (2) enrollment and utilization characteristics of Program participants. METHODS: We conducted a quantitative description of demographics, patient characteristics, and utilization of Program enrollees. RESULTS: Of 43 total enrollees, 44% received at least one dialysis treatment, whereas 56% received no dialysis. The median (range) hospice length of stay was 9 (1-76) days for all participants and 13 (4-76) days for those who received at least one dialysis treatment. The average number of dialysis treatments was 3.5 (range 1-9) for hemodialysis and 19.2 (range 3-65) for peritoneal dialysis. Sixty-five percent of enrollees died at home, 23% in inpatient hospice, and 12% in a nursing facility; no patients died in the hospital. CONCLUSIONS: Our 3-year experience with the Program demonstrated that enrollees had a longer median hospice stay than the previously reported 5-day median for patients with ESKD. Most patients received no further dialysis treatments despite the option to continue dialysis. Our experience provides evidence to support future work testing the effectiveness of such clinical programs to improve patient and utilization outcomes.

Primary palliative care for heart failure provided within ambulatory cardiology: A randomized pilot trial.

BACKGROUND: Heart failure is characterized by physical and emotional symptoms and decreased quality of life (QoL). Palliative care can reduce burdens of serious illness but often is limited to inpatient or academic settings. OBJECTIVES: To develop and test the Primary Education for Nurses in Palliative care-HF (PENPal-HF) intervention, training outpatient cardiology nurses to address symptom burden, patient priorities for care and QoL, and advance care planning as part of quarterly HF visits. METHODS: We conducted a pilot randomized clinical trial for adults with NYHA Stage III or IV HF and ≥ 2 hospitalizations in the past 12 months, recruited from a community-based cardiology clinic. Participants were randomized 2:1, PENPal-HF plus usual care versus usual care alone. Primary outcomes were feasibility and acceptability. RESULTS: We randomized 30 adults with Stage III HF - 20 to PENPal-HF and 10 to usual care. Most in the intervention group (71%) and in the control group (62%) completed the study through the final outcome assessment in week 56; 5 participants died. Of 20 participants in the intervention, 14 (70%) remained in the study through the end of intervention visits; 11 (55%) completed all visits. Most intervention participants (93.75%) agreed or strongly agreed that they were satisfied with their care, and 87.5% agreed or strongly agreed that all people with HF should receive the intervention. Most intervention group participants (93.75%) reported a perceived improvement in physical symptoms, mood, and/or QoL. CONCLUSIONS: This pilot study suggests that nurse-led primary palliative care in outpatient cardiology settings is promising. Research is warranted to determine efficacy and effectiveness.

Serious Illness Communication Skills Training during a Global Pandemic.

Background: Communication skills is a core competency for critical care fellowship training. The coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic has made it increasingly difficult to teach these skills in graduate medical education. We developed and implemented a novel, hybrid version of the Critical Care Communication (C3) skills with virtual and in-person components for pulmonary and critical care fellows. Objective: To develop and implement a new hybrid virtual/in-person version of the traditional C3 serious illness communication skills course and to compare learner outcomes to prior courses. Methods: We modified the C3 course in 2020 in response to the COVID-19 pandemic by adapting large-group didactic content to an online format that included both virtual asynchronous and virtual live content. Small-group skills training remained in person with trained actors and facilitators. We administered self-assessments to the participants and compared with historical data from the traditional in-person courses beginning in 2012. After the 2020 course, we collected informal feedback from a portion of the learners. Results: Like the traditional in-person version, participants rated the hybrid version highly. Learners reported feeling well prepared or very well prepared over 90% of the time in most communication skills after both versions of the course. Over 90% of participants in both versions of the course rated the specific course components as effective or very effective. Feedback from the learners indicates that they prefer the virtual didactics over traditional in-person didactics. Conclusions: Pulmonary and critical care fellows rated a hybrid version of a communication skills training similarly to the traditional in-person version of the course. We have provided a scaffolding on how to implement such a course. We anticipate some of the virtual components of this training will outlive the current pandemic based on learner feedback.

Clinicians' Perceptions of Collaborative Palliative Care Delivery in Chronic Kidney Disease.

CONTEXT: Guidelines recommend palliative care for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), who experience a high pain and symptom burden, and receive intensive treatments that often do not align with their values. A lack of scalable specialty palliative care services has prompted calls for attention to primary palliative care, delivered in primary care and nephrology settings. OBJECTIVES: The objectives of this study were to 1) describe expectations for care to meet the palliative care needs of people living with CKD, and limitations to meeting those expectations in the current model, and 2) identify potential interventions to meet patients' palliative care needs. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with clinicians from primary care, nephrology, and palliative care to assess 1) reasonable expectations for meeting palliative needs, 2) barriers to integrating primary palliative care, and 3) potential intervention points. RESULTS: Clinicians discussed their expectations for high-quality communication (e.g., discussing disease understanding, assessing goals of care) and better integration of palliative care services. Clinicians expressed barriers to delivering that care, including poor inter-clinician communication. To address barriers, clinicians outlined potential intervention points, such as building collaborative models of care, and structural triggers to identify patients who may be appropriate for palliative care. CONCLUSION: Interventions to address gaps in palliative care delivery for people living with CKD should incorporate systematic identification of patients with palliative care needs and structural mechanisms to meeting those needs via specialty and primary palliative care.

Use of Theoretical Frameworks in the Development and Testing of Palliative Care Interventions.

CONTEXT: Palliative care (PC) research has grown over the last 20 years. Yet, the causal components and pathways of PC interventions remain unclear. OBJECTIVES: To document the prevalence and application of theoretical frameworks in developing and testing PC interventions. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of previously published systematic reviews of PC randomized clinical trials. Trials were evaluated for explicit mention of a theoretical framework, process or delivery model, or clinical practice guideline that supported the development of the intervention. We used a structured data extraction form to document study population, outcomes, and whether and how authors used a theoretical framework, process/delivery model, or clinical practice guideline. We applied an adapted coding scheme to evaluate use of theoretical frameworks. RESULTS: We reviewed 85 PC trials conducted between 1984 and 2021. Thirty-eight percent (n = 32) of trials explicitly mentioned a theoretical framework, process or delivery model, or clinical practice guideline as a foundation for the intervention design. Only nine trials included a theoretical framework, while the remaining 23 cited a process/delivery model or clinical practice guideline. CONCLUSION: Most PC trials do not cite a theoretical foundation for their intervention design. Future work should focus on developing and validating new theoretical frameworks and modifying existing theories and models to better explain the mechanisms of the variety of PC interventions.

Evaluation of a Home-Based, Nurse Practitioner-led Advanced Illness Care Program.

OBJECTIVES: In the United States, people with serious illness often experience gaps and discontinuity in care. Gaps are frequently exacerbated by limited mobility, need for social support, and challenges managing multiple comorbidities. The Advanced Illness Care (AIC) Program provides nurse practitioner-led, home-based care for people with serious or complex chronic illnesses that specifically targets palliative care needs and coordinates with patients' primary care and specialty health care providers. We sought to investigate the effect of the AIC Program on hospital encounters [hospitalizations and emergency department (ED) visits], hospice conversion, and mortality. DESIGN: Retrospective nearest-neighbor matching. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Patients in AIC who had ≥1 inpatient stay within the 60 days prior to AIC enrollment to fee-for-service Medicare controls at 9 hospitals within one health system. METHODS: We matched on demographic characteristics and comorbidities, with exact matches for diagnosis-related group and home health enrollment. Outcomes were hospital encounters (30- and 90-day ED visits and hospitalizations), hospice conversion, and 30- and 90-day mortality. RESULTS: We included 110 patients enrolled in the AIC Program matched to 371 controls. AIC enrollees were mean age 77.0, 40.9% male, and 79.1% white. Compared with controls, AIC enrollees had a higher likelihood of ED visits at 30 [15.1 percentage points, confidence interval (CI) 4.9, 25.3; P = .004] and 90 days (27.8 percentage points, CI 16.0, 39.6; P < .001); decreased likelihood of hospitalization at 30 days (11.4 percentage points, CI -17.7, -5.0; P < .001); and a higher likelihood of converting to hospice (22.4 percentage points, CI 11.4, 33.3; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: The AIC Program provides care and coordination that the home-based serious illness population may not otherwise receive. IMPLICATIONS: By identifying and addressing care needs and gaps in care early, patients may avoid unnecessary hospitalizations and receive timely hospice services as they approach the end of life.

Associations between Reason for Inpatient Palliative Care Consultation, Timing, and Cost Savings.

Background: Specialty palliative care (SPC) provides patient-centered care to people with serious illness and may reduce costs. Specific cost-saving functions of SPC remain unclear. Objectives: (1) To assess the effect of SPC on inpatient costs and length of stay (LOS) and (2) to evaluate differences in costs by indication and timing of SPC. Design: Case-control with in patients who received an SPC consultation and propensity matched controls. Setting: One large U.S. integrated delivery finance system. Measurements: Using administrative data, we assessed costs associated with inpatient stays, a subset of whom received an SPC consultation. Consultations were stratified by reasons based on physician discretion: goals of care, pain management, hospice evaluation, nonpain symptom management, or support. The primary outcome was total operating costs and the secondary outcome was hospital LOS. Results: In total, 1404 patients with SPC consultations associated with unique hospital encounters were matched with 2806 controls. Total operating costs were lower for patients who received an SPC consultation when the consultation was within 0 to 1 days of admission ($6,924 vs. $7,635, p = 0.002). Likewise, LOS was shorter (4.3 vs. 4.7 days, p < 0.001). Upon stratification by reason, goals-of-care consultations early in the hospital stay (days 0-1) were associated with reduced total operating costs ($7,205 vs. $8,677, p < 0.001). Costs were higher for pain management consultations ($7,727 vs. $6,914, p = 0.047). Consultation for hospice evaluation was associated with lower costs, particularly when early (hospital days 0-1: $4,125 vs. $7,415, p < 0.001). Conclusions: SPC was associated with significant cost saving and decreased LOS when occurring early in a hospitalization and used for goals-of-care and hospice evaluation.