Out-of-Pocket Expenses for Long-Term Care by Dementia Status and Residential Setting among US Older Adults.

OBJECTIVE: To examine long-term care out-of-pocket payments by dementia status and residential setting. DESIGN: Compare monthly out-of-pocket long-term care expenses paid to facilities and helpers, total monthly out-of-pocket long-term expenses and as a percentage of monthly income by dementia status and residential status (community, residential facility, and nursing home). SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: US Nationwide, 2019 National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS) respondents aged ≥70 years. METHODS: We analyzed respondent-level data from the nationally representative 2019 NHATS. Weighted descriptive statistics were calculated for long-term care payments by source and summarized by dementia status and the respondent's residential status. RESULTS: Among 4505 respondents aged ≥70 years, 1750 (38.8%) had possible or probable dementia and 2755 (61.2%) had no dementia. The median monthly out-of-pocket long-term care expenses for persons with dementia was $1465 for those living in nursing homes, and $2925 for those living in other residential facilities, much higher than those with dementia living in the community ($260). Although these are similar to the median out-of-pocket payments for persons without dementia by setting, those with dementia were at greater risk of facing catastrophic out-of-pocket expenses for long-term care than those without dementia, with the 75th percentile value of out-of-pocket payment at $4566 among dementia adults living in non-nursing home residential care facilities, and $7500 for those in nursing homes, compared to $3694 and $3100 among those without dementia. At median, these expenses accounted for 100% of monthly income of respondents with dementia living in facilities. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS: Persons with dementia living in facilities often face substantial financial burdens from high out-of-pocket long-term care expenses. Policies that provide sufficient financial assistance are needed to address long-term care-related financial burdens experienced by older adults and their families, especially for those with dementia.

Health Care Costs Associated With Hospice Use For People With Dementia In The US.

Policy makers in the US are increasingly concerned that greater use of the Medicare hospice benefit by people with dementia is driving up costs. Yet this perspective fails to incorporate potential cost savings associated with hospice. We estimated the association between hospice use by people with dementia and health care costs, using Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey data from the period 2002-19. For community-dwelling people with dementia, Medicare costs were lower for those who used hospice than for those who did not, whether hospice enrollment was in the last three days ($2,200) or last three months ($7,200) of life, primarily through lower inpatient care costs in the last days of life. In nursing homes, total and Medicare costs were lower for hospice users with dementia who enrolled within a month of death than for those who did not use hospice. Total costs for the entire last year of life for those who used any days of hospice in the last year compared with no hospice did not differ, although Medicare costs were higher and Medicaid costs lower for those in nursing homes. Medicare policies that reduce hospice access and incentivize hospice disenrollment may actually increase Medicare costs, given that hospice cost savings generally derive from a person's last days or weeks of life.

Care Ecosystem Collaborative Model and Health Care Costs in Medicare Beneficiaries With Dementia: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: Collaborative dementia care programs are effective in addressing the needs of patients with dementia and their caregivers. However, attempts to consider effects on health care spending have been limited, leaving a critical gap in the conversation around value-based dementia care. Objective: To determine the effect of participation in collaborative dementia care on total Medicare reimbursement costs compared with usual care. Design, Setting, and Participants: This was a prespecified secondary analysis of the Care Ecosystem trial, a 12-month, single-blind, parallel-group randomized clinical trial conducted from March 2015 to March 2018 at 2 academic medical centers in California and Nebraska. Participants were patients with dementia who were living in the community, aged 45 years or older, and had a primary caregiver and Medicare fee-for-service coverage for the duration of the trial. Intervention: Telehealth dementia care program that entailed assignment to an unlicensed dementia care guide who provided caregiver support, standardized education, and connection to licensed dementia care specialists. Main Outcomes and Measures: Primary outcome was the sum of all Medicare claim payments during study enrollment, excluding Part D (drugs). Results: Of the 780 patients in the Care Ecosystem trial, 460 (59.0%) were eligible for and included in this analysis. Patients had a median (IQR) age of 78 (72-84) years, and 256 (55.7%) identified as female. Participation in collaborative dementia care reduced the total cost of care by $3290 from 1 to 6 months postenrollment (95% CI, -$6149 to -$431; P = .02) and by $3027 from 7 to 12 months postenrollment (95% CI, -$5899 to -$154; P = .04), corresponding overall to a mean monthly cost reduction of $526 across 12 months. An evaluation of baseline predictors of greater cost reduction identified trends for recent emergency department visit (-$5944; 95% CI, -$10 336 to -$1553; interaction P = .07) and caregiver depression (-$6556; 95% CI, -$11 059 to -$2052; interaction P = .05). Conclusions and Relevance: In this secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial among Medicare beneficiaries with dementia, the Care Ecosystem model was associated with lower total cost of care compared with usual care. Collaborative dementia care programs are a cost-effective, high-value model for dementia care. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02213458.

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.

Barriers of Acceptance to Hospice Care: a Randomized Vignette-Based Experiment.

BACKGROUND: The per diem financial structure of hospice care may lead agencies to consider patient-level factors when weighing admissions. OBJECTIVE: To investigate if treatment cost, disease complexity, and diagnosis are associated with hospice willingness to accept patients. DESIGN: In this 2019 online survey study, individuals involved in hospice admissions decisions were randomized to view one of six hypothetical patient vignettes: "high-cost, high-complexity," "low-cost, high-complexity," and "low-cost, low-complexity" within two diseases: heart failure and cystic fibrosis. Vignettes included demographics, prognoses, goals, and medications with costs. Respondents indicated their perceived likelihood of acceptance to their hospice; if likelihood was <100%, respondents were asked the barriers to acceptance. We used bivariate tests to examine associations between demographic, clinical, and organizational factors and likelihood of acceptance. PARTICIPANTS: Individuals involved in hospice admissions decisions MAIN MEASURES: Likelihood of acceptance to hospice care KEY RESULTS: N=495 (76% female, 53% age 45-64). Likelihoods of acceptance in cystic fibrosis were 79.8% (high-cost, high-complexity), 92.4% (low-cost, high-complexity), and 91.5% (low-cost, low-complexity), and in heart failure were 65.9% (high-cost, high-complexity), 87.3% (low-cost, high-complexity), and 96.6% (low-cost, low-complexity). For both heart failure and cystic fibrosis, respondents were less likely to accept the high-cost, high-complexity patient than the low-cost, high-complexity patient (65.9% vs. 87.3%, 79.8% vs. 92.4%, both p<0.001). For heart failure, respondents were less likely to accept the low-cost, high-complexity patient than the low-cost, low-complexity patient (87.3% vs. 96.6%, p=0.004). Treatment cost was the most common barrier for 5 of 6 vignettes. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that patients receiving expensive and/or complex treatments for palliation may have difficulty accessing hospice.

Functional and clinical needs of older hospice enrollees with coexisting dementia.

BACKGROUND: The Medicare Hospice Benefit increasingly serves people dying with dementia. We sought to understand characteristics, hospice use patterns, and last-month-of-life care quality ratings among hospice enrollees with dementia coexisting with another terminal illness as compared to enrollees with a principal hospice diagnosis of dementia, and enrollees with no dementia. METHODS: We conducted a pooled cross-sectional study among decedent Medicare beneficiaries age 70+ using longitudinal data from the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS) (last interview before death; after-death proxy interview) linked to Medicare hospice claims (2011-2017). We used unadjusted and adjusted regression analyses to compare characteristics of hospice enrollees with coexisting dementia to two groups: (1) enrollees with a principal dementia diagnosis, and (2) enrollees with no dementia. RESULTS: Among 1105 decedent hospice enrollees age 70+, 40% had coexisting dementia, 16% had a principal diagnosis of dementia, and 44% had no dementia. In adjusted analyses, enrollees with coexisting dementia had high rates of needing help with 3-6 activities of daily living, similar to enrollees with principal dementia (62% vs. 67%). Enrollees with coexisting dementia had high clinical needs, similar to those with no dementia, for example, 63% versus 61% had bothersome pain. Care quality was worse for enrollees with coexisting dementia versus principal dementia (e.g., 61% vs. 79% had anxiety/sadness managed) and similar to those with no dementia. Enrollees with coexisting dementia had similar hospice use patterns as those with principal diagnoses and higher rates of problematic use patterns compared to those with no dementia (e.g., 16% vs. 10% live disenrollment, p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: People with coexisting dementia have functional needs comparable to enrollees with principal diagnoses of dementia, and clinical needs comparable to enrollees with no dementia. Changes to hospice care models and policy may be needed to ensure appropriate dementia care.

Hospice Improves Care Quality For Older Adults With Dementia In Their Last Month Of Life.

The Medicare hospice benefit was originally designed around a cancer disease paradigm but increasingly serves people living with dementia. At this time, almost half of all older adults receiving hospice care have dementia. Yet there is minimal evidence as to whether hospice benefits people living with dementia outside of nursing facilities. We asked whether and how the perceived quality of last-month-of-life care differed between people with and without dementia and whether hospice use among people living with dementia was associated with perceived quality of care compared with the quality of care for those who did not use hospice. We used nationally representative data from the National Health and Aging Trends Study and Medicare claims from the period 2011-17 to examine the impact of hospice enrollment on proxy perceptions of last-month-of-life care quality. Proxies of people living with dementia enrolled in hospice compared with proxies of those not enrolled more often reported care to be excellent (predicted probability: 52 percent versus 41 percent), more often reported having anxiety or sadness managed (67 percent versus 46 percent), and less often reported changes in care settings in the last three days of life (10 percent versus 25 percent). There were no differences in the impact of hospice on proxy ratings of care for people with and without dementia. Policy makers should consider these benefits when weighing changes to hospice policy and regulations that may affect people living with dementia.

Life expectancy for community-dwelling persons with dementia and severe disability.

BACKGROUND: Understanding life expectancy can help persons with dementia, their care partners, and policymakers plan for what lies ahead. We sought to determine life expectancy and predictors of mortality for community-dwelling persons with dementia and severe disability. METHODS: Using the National Health and Aging Trends Study (NHATS) linked to Medicare claims, we identified community-dwelling respondents age 65+ who entered NHATS in 2011 with dementia and severe disability (defined as three impairments in activities of daily living), or who subsequently met criteria for dementia and then severe disability. We estimated time to death based on the timing of meeting severe disability criteria. We conducted parametric survival analyses using a Gompertz distribution to calculate risk of death and predicted median time to death. Predictors included demographic, functional, clinical characteristics, and behavioral symptoms (assessed among NHATS respondents with proxy interviews). RESULTS: Among 842 community-dwelling persons with dementia and severe disability, 80.5% died during the study period. After adjusting for age and gender, overall predicted median time to death was 1.7 years (25th percentile 0.6, 75th percentile 3.8 years). Six notable characteristics were associated with shorter life expectancy: 1) older age (90+), with a predicted median time to death of 1.0 year (0.4, 2.1); 2) being bedbound, 1.1 years (0.4, 2.3); 3) being homebound, 1.2 years (0.5, 2.6); 4) having comorbid cancer, 1.2 years (0.5, 2.6); 5) unintended weight loss, 1.4 years (0.5, 3.1); and 6) comorbid depression, 1.5 years (0.6, 3.3). CONCLUSIONS: Community-dwelling persons with dementia and severe disability lived a median of 1.7 years. Clinicians can use the study findings to provide anticipatory guidance to patients and care partners, and policymakers to inform design of longitudinal supportive services.

Medicare-funded home-based clinical care for community-dwelling persons with dementia: An essential healthcare delivery mechanism.

BACKGROUND: Over the past decade, medical care has shifted from institutions into home settings-particularly among persons with dementia. Yet it is unknown how home-based clinical services currently support persons with dementia, and what factors shape access. METHODS: Using the National Health and Aging Trends Study linked to Medicare claims 2012-2017, we identified 6664 community-dwelling adults age ≥ 70 years enrolled in fee-for-service Medicare. Annual assessment of dementia status was determined via self-report, cognitive interview, and/or proxy assessment. Receipt of four types of home-based clinical care (home-based medical care (HBMC) (i.e., nurse practitioner, physician, or physician assistant visits), skilled home health care (SHHC), podiatry visits, and other types of home-based clinical services (e.g., behavioral health)) was assessed annually. We compared age-adjusted rates of home-based clinical care by dementia status and determined sociodemographic, health, and environmental characteristics associated with utilization of home-based clinical care among persons with dementia. RESULTS: Nearly half (44.4%) of persons with dementia received any home-based clinical care annually compared to only 14.4% of those without dementia. Persons with dementia received substantially more of each type of home-based clinical care than those without dementia including a 5-fold increased use of HBMC (95% CI = 3.8-6.2) and double the use of SHHC (95% CI = 2.0-2.5). In adjusted models, Hispanic/Latino persons with dementia were less likely to receive HBMC (OR = 0.32; 95% CI = 0.11-0.93). Use of HBMC, podiatry, and other home-based clinical care was significantly more likely among those living in residential care facilities, in the Northeast and in metropolitan areas. CONCLUSION: Although almost half of community-dwelling persons with dementia receive home-based clinical care, there is significant variation in utilization based on race/ethnicity and environmental context. Increased understanding as to how these factors impact utilization is necessary to reduce potential inequities in healthcare delivery among the dementia population.

"It's Case by Case, and It's a Struggle": A Qualitative Study of Hospice Practices, Perspectives, and Ethical Dilemmas When Caring for Hospice Enrollees with Full-Code Status or Intensive Treatment Preferences.

Objective: Characterize hospice staff practices and perspectives on discussing end-of-life care preferences with patients/families, including those desiring intensive treatment and/or full code. Background: Patients in the United States can elect hospice while remaining full code or seeking intensive interventions, for example, blood transfusions, or chemotherapy. These preferences conflict with professional norms, hospice philosophy, and Medicare hospice payment policies. Little is known about how hospice staff manage patient/family preferences for full-code status and intensive treatments. Methods: We recruited employees of four nonprofit US hospices with varying clinical and hospice experience for semi-structured, in-depth interviews. Open-ended questions explored participants' practices and perceptions of discussing end-of-life care preferences in hospice, with specific probes about intensive treatment or remaining full code. Interdisciplinary researchers coded and analyzed data using the constant comparative method. Results: Participants included 25% executive leaders, 14% quality improvement administrative staff, 61% clinicians (23 nurses, 21 social workers, 7 physicians, and 2 chaplains). Participants reported challenges in engaging patients/families about end-of-life care preferences. Preferences for intensive treatment or full-code status presented an ethical dilemma for some participants. Participants described strategies to navigate such preferences, including educating about treatment options, and expressed diverse reactions, including accepting or attempting to shift enrollee preferences. Discussion: This study illuminates a rarely studied aspect of hospice care: how hospice staff engage with enrollees choosing full code and/or intensive treatments. Such patient preferences can produce ethical dilemmas for hospice staff. Enhanced communication training and guidelines, updated organizational and federal policies, and ethics consult services may mitigate these dilemmas.

What's Happening at Home: A Claims-based Approach to Better Understand Home Clinical Care Received by Older Adults.

BACKGROUND: Home clinical care (HCC) includes home-based medical care (HBMC-medical visits in the home) and skilled home health care (skilled nursing or therapy visits). Over 7 million older adults would benefit from HCC; however, we know surprisingly little about homebound older adults and HCC. OBJECTIVE: To describe HCC received by older adults using claims data within the OptumLabs Data Warehouse. RESEARCH DESIGN: Using administrative claims data for commercial and Medicare Advantage enrollees, we describe morbidity profiles, health service use, and care coordination (operationalized as care plan oversight [CPO]) for people receiving HCC and the subgroup receiving HBMC. PARTICIPANTS: Three million adults (3,027,247) age ≥65 with 12 months of continuous enrollment 2013-2014. MEASURES: CPT or HCPCS codes delineated HCC, HBMC, and CPO recipients and care site, frequency, and provider type. Other measures included demographic characteristics, clinical characteristics, and health care utilization. RESULTS: Overall, 5% of the study population (n=161,801) received 2+ months of HCC visits; of these, 46% also received 2+ HBMC visits (n=73,638) while 54% received only skilled home health (n=88,163 HCC but no HBMC). HBMC-recipients had high comorbidity burden (Charlson score 4.3), dementia (35%), and ambulance trips (58%), but few nursing facility admissions (4.9%). Evidence of care coordination (CPO claims) occurred in 30% of the HCC population, 46% of HBMC, and 17% of the skilled home health care only. CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 1 of 20 older adults in this study received HCC; 30% or less have a claim for care coordination by their primary care provider.

Care Settings and Clinical Characteristics of Older Adults with Moderately Severe Dementia.

OBJECTIVES: Little population-level evidence exists to guide the development of interventions for people with dementia in non-nursing home settings. We hypothesized people living at home with moderately severe dementia would differ in social, functional, and medical characteristics from those in either residential care or nursing home settings. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study using pooled data from the National Health and Aging Trends Study, an annual survey of a nationally representative sample of Medicare beneficiaries. SETTING: US national sample. PARTICIPANTS: Respondents newly meeting criteria for incident moderately severe dementia, defined as probable dementia with functional impairment: 728 older adults met our definition between 2012 and 2016. MEASUREMENTS: Social characteristics examined included age, sex, race/ethnicity, country of origin, income, educational attainment, partnership status, and household size. Functional characteristics included help with daily activities, falls, mobility device use, and limitation to home or bed. Medical characteristics included comorbid conditions, self-rated health, hospital stay, symptoms, and dementia behaviors. RESULTS: Extrapolated to the population, an estimated 3.3 million older adults developed incident moderately severe dementia between 2012 and 2016. Within this cohort, 64% received care at home, 19% in residential care, and 17% in a nursing facility. social, functional, and medical characteristics differed across care settings. Older adults living at home were 2 to 5 times more likely to be members of disadvantaged populations and had more medical needs: 71% reported bothersome pain compared with 60% in residential care or 59% in nursing homes. CONCLUSION: Over a 5-year period, 2.1 million people lived at home with incident moderately severe dementia. People living at home had a higher prevalence of demographic characteristics associated with systematic patterns of disadvantage, more social support, less functional impairment, worse health, and more symptoms compared with people living in residential care or nursing facilities. This novel study provides insight into setting-specific differences among people with dementia. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:1907-1912, 2019.

Variations in Costs of a Collaborative Care Model for Dementia.

OBJECTIVES: Care coordination programs can improve patient outcomes and decrease healthcare expenditures; however, implementation costs are poorly understood. We evaluate the direct costs of implementing a collaborative dementia care program. DESIGN: We applied a micro-costing analysis to calculate operational costs per-participant-month between March 2015 and May 2017. SETTING: The University of California, San Francisco (UCSF) and the University of Nebraska Medical Center (UNMC). PARTICIPANTS: Participants diagnosed with dementia, enrolled in Medicare or Medicaid, 45 years of age or older, residents of California, Nebraska or Iowa, and having a caregiver. The sample was 272 (UCSF) and 192 (UNMC) participants. INTERVENTION: A collaborative dementia care program provided by care team navigators (CTNs), advanced practice nurses, a social worker, and a pharmacist, focusing on caregiver support and education, medications, advance care planning, and behavior symptom management. MEASUREMENTS: We measured costs (personnel, supplies, equipment, and training costs) during three program periods, Start-up, Early Operations, and Continuing Operations, and estimated the effects of caseload variation on costs. RESULTS: Start-up and Early Operations costs were, respectively, $581 and $328 (California), and $501 and $219 (Nebraska) per-participant-month. Average costs decreased across phases to $241 (California) and $142 (Nebraska) per-participant-month during Continuing Operations. We estimated that costs would range between $75 (UNMC) and $92 (UCSF) per-participant-month with the highest projected caseloads (90). CONCLUSION: We found that CTN caseload is an important driver of service cost. We provide strategies for maximizing caseload without sacrificing quality of care. We also discuss current barriers to broad implementation that can inform new reimbursement policies. J Am Geriatr Soc 67:2628-2633, 2019.

The Role of Care Navigators Working with People with Dementia and Their Caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Care navigation is an approach to personalized care management and care coordination that can help overcome barriers to care. Care navigation has not been extensively studied in dementia, where health care workforce innovations are needed as a result of increasing disease prevalence and resulting costs to the health care system. OBJECTIVE: To identify facilitators and barriers to care navigation in dementia and to assess dementia caregiver satisfaction with care navigation. METHODS: Methods include qualitative research (interviews, focus groups, observations) with "Care Team Navigators" (CTNs) who were part of a dementia care navigation program, the Care Ecosystem, and a quantitative survey with caregivers about their experiences with CTNs. Transcripts were analyzed to identify themes within the data. RESULTS: CTNs identified the following facilitators to care navigation in dementia: working closely with caregivers; providing emotional support; tailoring education and resources; and coordinating with a clinical team around issues ranging from clinical questions to financial and legal decision-making. The barriers CTNS identified included burn-out, the progressive nature of the disease; coordinating with primary care providers; and identifying resources for dyads who are low-income, do not speak English, or live in rural areas. Caregivers across both sites highly rated CTNs, though satisfaction was higher among those in Nebraska and Iowa. CONCLUSIONS: Innovative approaches to care delivery in dementia are crucial. Care navigation offers a feasible model to train unlicensed people to deliver care as a way to deliver larger-scale support for the growing population of adults living with dementia and their caregivers.

Action Guide for Addressing Ethical Challenges of Resource Allocation Within Community-Based Healthcare Organizations.

This article proposes an action guide to making decisions regarding the ethical allocation of resources that affect access to healthcare services offered by community-based healthcare organizations. Using the filter of empirical data from a study of decision making in two community-based healthcare organizations, we identify potentially relevant conceptual guidance from a review of frameworks and action guides in the public health, health policy, and organizational ethics literature. We describe the development of this action guide. We used data from a prior empirical study of the values that influence decision making about the allocation of resources in particular types of community-based healthcare organizations. We evaluated, organized, and specified the conceptual guidance we found in 14 frameworks for ethical decision making. The result is an action guide that includes four domains that are relevant to the context of the decision to be made, eight domains that are relevant to the process of the decision to be made, and 15 domains that are relevant to the criteria of the decision to be made. We demonstrate the potential use of this action guide by walking through an illustrative resource allocation decision. The action guide provides community-based healthcare organizations with a conceptually grounded, empirically informed framework for ethical decision making.

First Medicare Demonstration of Concurrent Provision of Curative and Hospice Services for End-of-Life Care.

Hospice developed in the United States in the 1970s as a way to address unmet needs for end-of-life care: support for pain and symptom management provided in the location and manner that the patient and family prefer. In Europe and Australia, hospice is available from the time of diagnosis of an advanced life-limiting illness onward, but in the United States, the Medicare hospice benefit restricts eligibility for these services to patients who no longer receive curative treatment. We provide background and analysis of the first Medicare hospice demonstration in 35 years that will test the concurrent provision of curative and hospice services for terminally ill individuals with a life expectancy of six months or less. This demonstration is a harbinger of potential policy changes to hospice and palliative care in the United States that could reduce barriers to end-of-life care that aligns with patient and family preferences as the demand for care increases with an aging population.