Changing Pediatric Hospice and Palliative Care Through Medicaid Partnerships.

Since its inception in 2010, the Concurrent Care for Children Provision of the Affordable Care Act has enabled seriously ill pediatric patients and their families to access comprehensive, supportive hospice services while simultaneously receiving ongoing treatment-directed therapies. Although this groundbreaking federal legislation has resulted in improvements in care for vulnerable pediatric patients, the implementation of the law has varied from state to state through Medicaid programming. The pediatric professional community is called to consider how Medicaid services can more effectively be delivered by leveraging legislative mandates and collaborative relationships between clinicians, Medicaid administrators, and policy makers. In this article, we examine ways concurrent care has been executed in 3 different states and how key stakeholders in care for children with serious illness advocated to ensure effective implementation of the legislation. The lessons learned in working with state Medicaid programs are applicable to any advocacy issue impacting children and families .

Implementation of a Perinatal Hospice Program.

BACKGROUND: In 2017, the Nebraska Unicameral passed legislative bill 506, which required physicians to inform patients carrying fetuses diagnosed with a life-limiting anomaly of the option to enroll in a comprehensive perinatal hospice program. The bill also required the Department of Health & Human Services to provide information about statewide hospice programs. Families enrolled in hospice programs are better prepared for the birth and death of their child. This large academic medical center was listed on the registry but did not have a formal perinatal hospice program. PURPOSE: Implementation of a comprehensive perinatal hospice program. METHODS: The program was designed and implemented, beginning with the formation of an interdisciplinary team. Guidelines were developed for program referral, care conferences, team communication, and family follow-up. The team was educated. Electronic record documentation and order set were implemented. A data collection process was developed to track referrals and critical data points. RESULTS: The perinatal hospice program has been accepting referrals but has not had any qualifying referrals. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: The development of an evidence-based guideline for referral that can improve referral consistency. While trisomy 13 and 18 diagnosis was historically considered life-limiting, these families now have the option of full intervention and transfer for specialists. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Future research will include collecting data from patients who could have benefited from hospice, including infants who were born 20 to 22 weeks, or for maternal reasons. Future research will evaluate the experience after bereavement, the hospice team's experience, and the effectiveness of the referral process.

"Death is inevitable - a bad death is not" report from an international workshop.

Palliative care is an approach meant to improve the quality of life of patients facing life-threatening illness and to support their families. An international workshop on palliative care took place in Caesarea, Israel under the auspices of the National Institute for Health Policy Research on July 4-5th, 2018, with the goal of discussing challenges to the development and integration of palliative care services in Israel. At the workshop, both national and international figures in the field of palliative care and health policy addressed several issues, including truth telling, religious approaches to end of life care, palliative care in the community, pediatric palliative care, Israel's Dying Patient Act, the Ministry of Health's National Plan for palliative care, and challenges in using advance directives. We summarize the topics addressed, challenges highlighted, and directions for further advancement of palliative care in the future, emphasizing the critical role of the Ministry of Health in providing a framework for development of palliative care.

State Legislation to Prevent Diversion of Opioids in Hospice Programs: A Deeper Look Into Ohio Law.

The problem of opioid diversion and its contribution to the opioid epidemic are well known nationally, existing even within hospice care. Proper disposal of opioids may be a critical factor in reducing diversion. In 2014, Ohio implemented legislation requiring a hospice employee to destroy or witness disposal of all unused opioids within a patient's plan of care. The purpose of this study was to determine the impact of Ohio Revised Code 3712.062 on hospice programs' policies and procedures to prevent opioid diversion in the home. Directors of Ohio-licensed hospices were surveyed to assess the percentage of programs with a written policy in place for disposal of opioids and to calculate a compliance score based on responses to survey questions assessing compliance with legislation components. Fifty-two surveys were completed (39.4%). All survey respondents reported having a written policy in place. A 95.5% average compliance score was calculated, with the largest disparity occurring with timing of opioid disposal. While Ohio Revised Code 3712.062 requires opioid disposal at the time of patient's death or when no longer needed by the patient, only 84% of respondents report disposing opioids upon discontinuation. Overall, a high compliance rate was seen among hospice programs indicating such regulation is manageable to meet.

A Farewell to Falsity: Shifting Standards in Medicare Fraud Enforcement.

For the better part of a decade, Americans have had a front-row seat to a fervent and turbulent debate over the future of their health care system. The passage of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010 (ACA), the most comprehensive health reform effort since the mid-1960s, ushered in a new era in health law and policy, granting millions of Americans access to health care. After multiple legal challenges and congressional efforts that ultimately failed to slay the law, the ACA had become entrenched by the end of the Obama administration, even though pieces of the law had failed to work exactly as planned. Now, with the surprising election of President Donald Trump, reenergized Republicans are targeting the law once more, and it suddenly appears more vulnerable than ever. Dynamic uncertainty again permeates the national debate. Although most powerful protections of the ACA may evaporate--no small event, to be sure--the value-based era which it unleashed seems here to stay. Indeed, this era--focused on efficiency, standardization, and quality within American medicine--has just begun to bear fruit. Illustrated prominently by recent changes to Medicare that alter how the program pays its doctors for services they provide to its beneficiaries, America is moving away from the old strictures of fee-for-service medicine. At the same time, traditional legal tools, and particularly the federal government's most prominent anti-fraud tool, the civil federal False Claims Act (FCA), seem to be facing new limits. This has been recently evident in medical necessity-based fraud cases, and particularly highly publicized fights that have targeted the burgeoning industry of hospice care. This Article tracks this development, ultimately arguing that the move to "reimbursement-based regulation" may be a positive step in finally reining in the worst excesses of American health care. But it also cautions against the deceptive simplicity of allowing medical heterogeneity and clinical complexity to prevent application of America's most powerful anti-fraud tools to its medical industry. Just because reimbursement policy has shifted to shoulder some of the regulatory burden of overtreatment does not mean that health care fraud--like fee-for-service medicine--should be confined to the past. In the end--and regardless of whatever legislation the national debate surrounding American health care produces--American medicine must adequately address its susceptibility to overtreatment, its incentives toward financial excess and waste, and its inability to push providers and entities into adopting more efficient practices. Medicare is finally moving quickly to bring about effective changes, and the program is seeking clarity in the midst of a period of tremendous uncertainty for American health care.

Hospice Underutilization in the U.S.: The Misalignment of Regulatory Policy and Clinical Reality.

After three and a half decades of experience with the Medicare hospice benefit in the U.S., despite excellent quality outcomes in symptom management, patient and family satisfaction, and reduction in health care costs, only 12%-15% of beneficiaries' days during the last year of life are spent being cared for within the highly cost-effective interdisciplinary coordinated advanced illness care model known as hospice. Although there are many reasons for this, including difficulties in acknowledging mortality among patients, their families, and physicians, a significant cause of low overall hospice utilization and intractably low median lengths of stay, reflective of late admissions, can be attributed to increasingly difficult and highly variable prognostic determinations for most of the leading causes of death among Medicare beneficiaries. Medicare is the payer for most hospice care in the U.S. and requires certification of a prognosis of six months or less for a beneficiary to access hospice support. At the time of admission to hospice, two physicians must predict that a patient is more likely to die in the next six months than survive, based on clinical status. In addition to prognostic uncertainty constituting a barrier to timely hospice referral, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services and its payer contractors have developed a robust and expensive retrospective review process that penalizes hospices when patients outlive their expected prognosis. The administratively burdensome and financially punitive review practices further delay or limit access to care for eligible patients as certifying physicians and agencies, fearful of the financial and legal repercussions of reviews and audits, are hesitant to take patients under care unless they are clearly in the dying process. This article will review pertinent history and address the core problem of access to a health care benefit built on a policy that requires far greater prognostic certainty than any clinician can reasonably ascertain and fails to take into consideration the favorable impact hospice care has on terminally ill patients in improving prognosis. This clinical conundrum that limits access of seriously ill people to high-value quality care is of profound importance to the U.S. Medicare population and also one with potential relevance to all complex and regulated health systems and to other models of care whose eligibility criteria are based on prognostication.

Medicare Program; FY 2019 Hospice Wage Index and Payment Rate Update and Hospice Quality Reporting Requirements. Final rule.

This final rule updates the hospice wage index, payment rates, and cap amount for fiscal year (FY) 2019. The rule also makes conforming regulations text changes to recognize physician assistants as designated hospice attending physicians effective January 1, 2019. Finally, the rule includes changes to the Hospice Quality Reporting Program.

Medicare Program; FY 2018 Hospice Wage Index and Payment Rate Update and Hospice Quality Reporting Requirements. Final rule.

This final rule will update the hospice wage index, payment rates, and cap amount for fiscal year (FY) 2018. Additionally, this rule includes new quality measures and provides an update on the hospice quality reporting program.

[New legal regulations for palliative care with implications for politics and practice]. / Neue gesetzliche Regelungen für die Palliativversorgung und ihre Implikationen für Politik und Praxis.

In December 2015 two different laws were adopted. Both are of importance for palliative care. One of the laws criminalizes commercial, "business-like" assisted suicide (§ 217 German Criminal Code), the other one aims to improve hospice and palliative care in Germany. Through the latter far-reaching changes in Social Code Books V and XI, as well as of the Hospital Finance Act have been made. This new Act to Improve Hospice and Palliative Care (HPG) focuses, amongst others, on: (a) Better funding of hospice services, by raising the minimum grant for patients in inpatient hospices paid per day by the health insurance funds by about 28.5%, and for outpatient hospice services by about 18%; (b) further development of general outpatient nursing and medical palliative care, and the networking of different service providers; (c) introduction of an arbitration procedure for service provider agreements to be concluded between the health insurance funds and the teams providing specialized home palliative care (SAPV); (d) the right to individual advice and support by the health insurance funds; (e) care homes may offer their residents advance care planning programs to be funded by the statutory health insurers; (f) palliative care units in hospitals can be remunerated outside the DRG system by per diem rates; (g) separate funding and criteria for multi-professional palliative care services within a hospital.While little concrete impact on hospice and palliative care can be expected following the new § 217 German Criminal Code, the HPG provides a good basis to improve care. For this purpose, however, which complementary and more concrete agreements are made to put the new legal regulations into practice will be crucial.

The Effect of Pediatric Palliative Care Policy on Hospice Utilization Among California Medicaid Beneficiaries.

CONTEXT: California implemented pediatric palliative care legislations that allowed children to receive curative and supportive care from diagnosis of a life-threatening serious illness in 2010. Palliative care policies may improve access to hospice care as children near end of life. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to examine the effect of the palliative care policy on hospice utilization for children and their families was investigated. METHODS: Using 2007 and 2010 California Medicaid data, a difference-in-difference analysis was conducted to analyze hospice use (i.e., hospice enrollment, hospice length of stay) changes for children who resided in pediatric policy counties relative to those who did not. The sample of children in California who died with a life-threatening serious illness in 2007 and 2010 equaled 979 children. RESULTS: More than 10% of children enrolled in hospice care with an average of less than 3 days of hospice care. The palliative care policy did not have any effect on hospice enrollment. However, the policy was positively associated with increasing days in hospice care (incidence rate ratio = 5.61, P < 0.05). The rate of hospice length of stay increased by a factor of 5.61 for children in palliative care counties compared with children unaffected by the policy. CONCLUSION: The pediatric palliative care policy was associated with longer lengths of stay in hospice once the children were enrolled. Policies promoting palliative care are critical to ensuring access to hospice care for children.

Medicare Program; FY 2017 Hospice Wage Index and Payment Rate Update and Hospice Quality Reporting Requirements. Final rule.

This final rule will update the hospice wage index, payment rates, and cap amount for fiscal year (FY) 2017. In addition, this rule changes the hospice quality reporting program, including adopting new quality measures. Finally, this final rule includes information regarding the Medicare Care Choices Model (MCCM).

Cost Analysis and Policy Implications of a Pediatric Palliative Care Program.

CONTEXT: In 2010, California launched Partners for Children (PFC), a pediatric palliative care pilot program offering hospice-like services for children eligible for full-scope Medicaid delivered concurrently with curative care, regardless of the child's life expectancy. OBJECTIVES: We assessed the change from before PFC enrollment to the enrolled period in 1) health care costs per enrollee per month (PEPM), 2) costs by service type and diagnosis category, and 3) health care utilization (days of inpatient care and length of hospital stay). METHODS: A pre-post analysis compared enrollees' health care costs and utilization up to 24 months before enrollment with their costs during participation in the pilot, from January 2010 through December 2012. Analyses were conducted using paid Medicaid claims and program enrollment data. RESULTS: The average PEPM health care costs of program enrollees decreased by $3331 from before their participation in PFC to the enrolled period, driven by a reduction in inpatient costs of $4897 PEPM. PFC enrollees experienced a nearly 50% reduction in the average number of inpatient days per month, from 4.2 to 2.3. Average length of stay per hospitalization dropped from an average of 16.7 days before enrollment to 6.5 days while in the program. CONCLUSION: Through the provision of home-based therapeutic services, 24/7 access to medical advice, and enhanced, personally tailored care coordination, PFC demonstrated an effective way to reduce costs for children with life-limiting conditions by moving from costly inpatient care to more coordinated and less expensive outpatient care. PFC's home-based care strategy is a cost-effective model for pediatric palliative care elsewhere.

Medicare Program; FY 2016 Hospice Wage Index and Payment Rate Update and Hospice Quality Reporting Requirements. Final rule.

This final rule will update the hospice payment rates and the wage index for fiscal year (FY) 2016 (October 1, 2015 through September 30, 2016), including implementing the last year of the phase-out of the wage index budget neutrality adjustment factor (BNAF). Effective on January 1, 2016, this rule also finalizes our proposals to differentiate payments for routine home care (RHC) based on the beneficiary's length of stay and implement a service intensity add-on (SIA) payment for services provided in the last 7 days of a beneficiary's life, if certain criteria are met. In addition, this rule will implement changes to the aggregate cap calculation mandated by the Improving Medicare Post-Acute Care Transformation Act of 2014 (IMPACT Act), align the cap accounting year for both the inpatient cap and the hospice aggregate cap with the federal fiscal year starting in FY 2017, make changes to the hospice quality reporting program, clarify a requirement for diagnosis reporting on the hospice claim, and discuss recent hospice payment reform research and analyses.