Billed advance care planning visits may be occurring among older adults with high risk of mortality.

CONTEXT: Advance care planning (ACP) is a process that helps people prepare to make decisions about their future medical care. OBJECTIVES: We sought to understand who was received billed ACP visits and measure the association with health care utilization, cost, and mortality. METHODS: We used a randomly sampled 20 % cohort of Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries' files to conduct a retrospective cohort study. Beneficiaries with a billed ACP visit were matched to controls using a 2-stage propensity score matching process that included assigning a pseudo-ACP visit date for controls. Outcomes included healthcare utilization, mortality, and total medical cost per month. We used descriptive statistics for univariate analysis and fit multilevel logistic regression, multilevel linear regression, or Cox regression models. RESULTS: We identified 183,513 beneficiaries who received any billed ACP visit and 550,539 matched controls. Of those who had a ACP visit, the mean age was 76.5 years and high-risk comorbidities were common: 16 % dementia, 10 % congestive heart failure, 10 % cancer. Beneficiaries who had an ACP visit had slightly more health care utilization than controls. Beneficiaries who had an ACP visit were more likely to die (3.1% vs. 1.0 %, p < 0.01, OR=3.0, 95 %CI 2.9-3.2) in the unadjusted and adjusted analyses compared to matched controls. Total monthly medical costs were 33 % higher among beneficiaries who had an ACP visit. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that ACP visits may be preferentially utilized amongst individuals with higher risk of mortality. There may be an opportunity to increase ACP visits among older adults at lower risk for mortality. KEY MESSAGE: This article suggests that ACP visits are likely targeted to older adults with a higher risk of mortality than those at lower risk of mortality suggesting an opportunity to reach people before they are facing end-of-life decisions.

Regional Variation in Billed Advance Care Planning Visits.

BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVE: Advance care planning (ACP) is associated with improved patient and caregiver outcomes, but is underutilized. To encourage ACP, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services implemented specific ACP visit reimbursement codes in 2016. To better understand the utilization of these ACP reimbursement codes, we explored regional variation in billed ACP visits. DESIGN: We performed a retrospective cross-sectional analysis using a randomly sampled 5% cohort of Medicare fee-for-service (FFS) beneficiaries' claims files from 2017. Region was defined by hospital referral region. SETTING: National Medicare FFS. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 1.3 million Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years and older. MEASUREMENT: Receipt of billed ACP service, identified through Current Procedural Terminology code 99497 or 99498. Proportion of beneficiaries who received billed ACP service(s) by region was calculated. We fit a multilevel logistic regression model with a random regional intercept to determine the variation in billed ACP visits attributable to the region after accounting for patient (demographics, comorbidities, and medical care utilization) and regional factors (hospital size, emergency department visits, hospice utilization, and costs). RESULTS: The study population included about 1.3 million beneficiaries, of which 32,137 (2.4%) had at least one billed ACP visit in 2017. There was substantial regional variation in the percentage of beneficiaries with billed ACP visits: lowest quintile region, less than 0.83%; subsequent regions, less than 1.6%, less than 2.4%, less than 3.3% to less than 8.4% in the highest quintile regions. A total of 15.4% of the variance in whether an older adult had a billed ACP visit was explained by the region. Although numerous regional factors were associated with billed ACP visits, none were strong predictors. CONCLUSION: In 2017, we found wide regional variation in the use of billed ACP visits, although use overall was low in all regions. Increasing the understanding of the drivers and the effects of billed ACP visits could inform strategies for increasing ACP.

Economics of Palliative Care for Cancer: Interpreting Current Evidence, Mapping Future Priorities for Research.

The National Cancer Institute estimates that $154 billion will be spent on care for people with cancer in 2019, distributed across the year after diagnosis (31%), the final year of life (31%), and continuing care between those two (38%). Projections of future costs estimate persistent growth in care expenditures. Early research studies on the economics of palliative care have reported a general pattern of cost savings during inpatient hospital admissions and the end-of-life phase. Recent research has demonstrated more complex dynamics, but expanding palliative care capacity to meet clinical guidelines and population health needs seems to save costs. Quantifying these cost savings requires additional research, because there is significant variance in estimates of the effects of treatment on costs, depending on the timing of intervention, the primary diagnosis, and the overall illness burden. Because ASCO guidelines state that palliative care should be provided concurrently with other treatment from the point of diagnosis onward for all metastatic cancer, new and ambitious research is required to evaluate the cost effects of palliative care across the entire disease trajectory. We propose a series of ways to reach the guideline goals.

Improving Advanced Care Planning through Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) Expansion across the United States: Lessons Learned from State-Based Developments.

BACKGROUND: The Physician Orders for Life-Sustaining Treatment (POLST) Paradigm is an effective advance care planning tool. However, barriers to implementation persist. In the United States, POLST program development occurs at the state-level. Substantial differences between states has left POLST implementation largely unstandardized. No peer-reviewed studies to date have evaluated state-based POLST program development over time. OBJECTIVE: To assess and learn from the successes and barriers in state-based POLST program development over time to improve the reach of POLST or similar programs across the United States. DESIGN: An exploratory, prospective cohort study that utilized semistructured telephone interviews was conducted over a 3-year period (2012-2015). Stakeholder representatives from state POLST coalitions (n = 14) were repeatedly queried on time-relevant successes, barriers, and innovations during POLST program development with levels of legislative and medical barriers rated 1 to 10. Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using techniques grounded in qualitative theory. RESULTS: All coalition representatives reported continuous POLST expansion with improved outreach and community partnerships. Significant barriers to expansion included difficulty in securing funding for training and infrastructure, lack of statewide metric systems to adequately assess expansion, lack of provider support, and legislative concerns. Medical barriers (mean [standard deviation]: 5.0 [0.2]) were rated higher than legislative (3.0 [0.6]; P < .001). CONCLUSION: POLST programs continue to grow, but not without barriers. Based on the experiences of developing coalitions, we were able to identify strategies to expand POLST programs and overcome barriers. Ultimately the "lessons learned" in this study can serve as a guide to improve the reach of POLST or similar programs.

Use of Advance Care Planning Billing Codes in a Tertiary Care Center Setting.

INTRODUCTION: The Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services released the final payment rules for reimbursement of advance care planning (ACP) effective January 2016. In its first year, 23,000 providers nationwide submitted 624,000 claims using the Current Procedural Terminology codes 99497 and 99498. The objectives of our study were to 1) assess the frequency of ACP codes used at a single academic tertiary care center in Iowa, 2) determine when and by whom the codes were used, and 3) summarize ACP clinical notes. METHODS: Using the electronic medical record data warehouse from a single tertiary teaching hospital and affiliated clinics, date of service, department where service was provided, provider name and type, patient medical record number, date of birth, and gender linked to the ACP codes 99497 and 99498 were collected. The content of ACP clinical notes were reviewed and summarized. Study period was from January 1, 2016 through September 19, 2018. RESULTS: During the 33 months, code 99497 was used 17 times and code 99498 was never used. Code 99497 was successfully reimbursed 4 times. DISCUSSION: Charges were not reimbursed if the ACP visits did not meet the minimum time requirement or were conducted by an individual not considered a qualified health care professional per Medicare rules. CONCLUSION: ACP codes 99497 and 99498 were very rarely used at this tertiary care center during the initial 33-months after the Medicare rules went into effect. Interventions are needed to promote the use of ACP codes, so the time spent in important ACP discussions are properly compensated.

Features of U.S. Primary Care Physicians and Their Practices Associated with Advance Care Planning Conversations.

INTRODUCTION: Primary care practices are essential settings for Advance Care Planning (ACP) conversations with patients. We hypothesized that such conversations occur more routinely in Advanced Primary Care/Patient Centered Medical Home (APCP/PCMH) Practices using practice transformation strategies. METHODS: We analyzed characteristics of physician respondents and their practices associated with ACP discussions in older and sicker patients using US data from the 2015 Commonwealth Fund International Survey of Primary Care Physicians in 10 Nations. The primary outcome was how routinely these ACP conversations are reported. We developed an index of APCP/PCMH features as a practice covariable. RESULTS: Respondents (N = 1001) were predominantly male (60%) and ≥45 years old (74%). Multivariable analyses showed that suburban practice location was associated with fewer ACP conversations; working in a practice commonly seeing patients with multiple chronic conditions or who have palliative care needs, and working in a practice from which home visits are made, were associated with more ACP conversations. Physicians compensated in part by capitation were more likely to report ACP conversations. No association was found between a single item asking if the practice was an APCP/PCMH and having ACP conversations. However, higher scores on an index of APCP/PCMH features were associated with more ACP conversations. CONCLUSIONS: In this sample of US primary care physicians, the types of patients seen, practice location, and physician compensation influenced whether physicians routinely discuss ACP with patients who are older and sicker. Practices demonstrating more features of APCP/PCMH models of primary care are also associated with ACP discussions.

Costs and outcomes of advance care planning and end-of-life care for older adults with end-stage kidney disease: A person-centred decision analysis.

BACKGROUND: Economic evaluations of advance care planning (ACP) in people with chronic kidney disease are scarce. However, past studies suggest ACP may reduce healthcare costs in other settings. We aimed to examine hospital costs and outcomes of a nurse-led ACP intervention compared with usual care in the last 12 months of life for older people with end-stage kidney disease managed with haemodialysis. METHODS: We simulated the natural history of decedents on dialysis, using hospital data, and modelled the effect of nurse-led ACP on end-of-life care. Outcomes were assessed in terms of patients' end-of-life treatment preferences being met or not, and costs included all hospital-based care. Model inputs were obtained from a prospective ACP cohort study among dialysis patients; renal registries and the published literature. Cost-effectiveness of ACP was assessed by calculating an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), expressed in dollars per additional case of end-of-life preferences being met. Robustness of model results was tested through sensitivity analyses. RESULTS: The mean cost of ACP was AUD$519 per patient. The mean hospital costs of care in last 12 months of life were $100,579 for those who received ACP versus $87,282 for those who did not. The proportion of patients in the model who received end-of-life care according to their preferences was higher in the ACP group compared with usual care (68% vs. 24%). The incremental cost per additional case of end-of-life preferences being met was $28,421. The greatest influence on the cost-effectiveness of ACP was the probability of dying in hospital following dialysis withdrawal, and costs of acute care. CONCLUSION: Our model suggests nurse-led ACP leads to receipt of patient preferences for end-of-life care, but at an increased cost.

Case-control study of end-of-life treatment preferences and costs following advance care planning for adults with end-stage kidney disease.

AIM: The aim of the present study was to examine the efficacy of advance care planning (ACP) to improve the likelihood that end-stage kidney disease (ESKD) patient's preferences will be known and adhered to at end-of-life. METHODS: A case-control study of a nurse-led ACP programme in adults with ESKD from a major tertiary hospital. The primary outcome was the proportion of patients whose preferences were known (by substitute decision maker and/or clinicians) and adhered to by their treating doctors. Secondary measures were health system resource use and costs ($AUD) for a nurse-led ACP intervention in the last 12-months of life. RESULTS: In total, 57 cases (38 men, mean age 73.8 years) and 57 historical controls (38 men, mean age 74.0 years) were included. Cases (38/57, 67%) were significantly more likely than controls (15/57, 26%) to have their preferences known and adhered to by their treating doctor at end-of-life (P < 0.001). Cases (33/40, 83%) were also significantly more likely to withdraw from dialysis in accordance with their preferences than controls (11/33, 33%) (P < 0.001). For cases, the average hospital costs in the last 12 months of life was AUD $99 077 (SD = $71 002) per patient. The total cost of the ACP programme in 2010/2011 was AUD $26 821. CONCLUSION: Advance care planning was associated with improvements in end-of-life care preferences being known and adhered to for people with ESKD.

Death of outrage over talking about dying.

OBJECTIVES: We examined public reaction to the proposed Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services rule reimbursing physicians for advanced care planning (ACP) discussions with patients. METHODS: Public comments made on regulations.gov were reviewed for relevance to ACP policy and their perceived position on ACP (ie, positive, negative and neutral). Descriptive statistics were used to quantify the results. RESULTS: A total of 2225 comments were submitted to regulations.gov. On review, 69.0% were categorised as irrelevant; among relevant comments (n=689), 81.1% were positive, 18.6% were negative and 0.002% were neutral. Individuals submitted a greater percentage of the total comments as compared to organisations (63.5% and 36.5%, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: The US Medicare programme is a tax financed social insurance programme that covers all patients 65 years of age and older, including 8 in 10 decedents annually, and it is the part of the US healthcare system most similar to the rest of world. There has been a trend globally towards recognising the importance of aligning patient preferences with care options, including palliative care to deal with advanced life limiting illness. However, ACP is not widely used in the USA, potentially reducing the use of palliative care. Reimbursing ACP discussions between physicians, patients and their family has the potential to have a large impact on the quality of life of persons near death, which can greatly impact public health and the comfort in dealing with our ultimate demise.

For People Dying to Talk, It Finally Pays to Listen with Reimbursable Advance Care Planning.

Whether at the beginning, middle, or end of life, health care delivery choices abound. Yet only recently have conversations specifically regarding preferences for care at the end of life become a reimbursable intervention, deemed equivalent in importance to a medical procedure. Quite distinct from other procedures, in which expectations for outcomes are explicit and measurable, outcomes have been left intentionally vague for advanced care planning (ACP) conversations. This article will explore the inherent challenges of and opportunities for developing formalized outcomes, methods of measurement, and training to ensure excellence in the performance of ACP conversation procedures. Whether at the beginning, middle, or end of life, health care delivery choices abound. Yet only recently have conversations specifically regarding preferences for care at the end of life become a reimbursable intervention, deemed equivalent in importance to a medical procedure. Quite distinct from other procedures, in which expectations for outcomes are explicit and measurable, outcomes have been left intentionally vague for advanced care planning (ACP) conversations. This article will explore the inherent challenges of and opportunities for developing formalized outcomes, methods of measurement, and training to ensure excellence in the performance of ACP conversation procedures.

A Framework to Guide Economic Analysis of Advance Care Planning.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning (ACP) is fundamental to guiding medical care at the end of life. Understanding the economic impact of ACP is critical to implementation, but most economic evaluations of ACP focus on only a few actors, such as hospitals. OBJECTIVE: To develop a framework for understanding and quantifying the economic effects of ACP, particularly its distributional consequences, for use in economic evaluations. DESIGN: Literature review of economic analyses of ACP and related costs to estimate magnitude and direction of costs and benefits for each actor and how data on these costs and benefits could be obtained or estimated. RESULTS: ACP can lead to more efficient allocation of resources by reducing low-value care and reallocating resources to high-value care, and can increase welfare by aligning care to patient preferences. This economic framework considers the costs and benefits of ACP that accrue to or are borne by six actors: the patient, the patient's family and caregivers, healthcare providers, acute care settings, subacute and home care settings, and payers. Program implementation costs and nonhealthcare costs, such as time costs borne by patients and caregivers, are included. Findings suggest that out-of-pocket costs for patients and families will likely change if subacute or home care is substituted for acute care, and subacute care utilization is likely to increase while primary healthcare providers and acute care settings may experience heterogeneous effects. CONCLUSIONS: A comprehensive economic evaluation of ACP should consider how costs and benefits accrue to different actors.

Change without Change? Assessing Medicare Reimbursement for Advance Care Planning.

In January 2016, Medicare began reimbursing clinicians for time spent engaging in advance care planning with their patients or patients' surrogates. Such planning involves discussions of the care an individual would want to receive should he or she one day lose the capacity to make health care decisions or have conversations with a surrogate about, for example, end-of-life wishes. Clinicians can be reimbursed for face-to-face explanation and discussion of care and advance directives and for the completion of advance care planning forms. Although it seems that political barriers to reimbursement for such planning have largely faded, the Medicare policy's impact on provider billing practices appears to be limited, suggesting other barriers to clinician engagement in advance care planning. Additionally, the effects of this policy on patient behavior and the clinician-patient relationship are not yet known.