4.6 Article

Trends in Hospice Discharge and Relative Outcomes Among Medicare Patients in the Get With The Guidelines Heart Failure Registry

Journal

JAMA CARDIOLOGY
Volume 3, Issue 10, Pages 917-926

Publisher

AMER MEDICAL ASSOC
DOI: 10.1001/jamacardio.2018.2678

Keywords

-

Funding

  1. Amgen
  2. Medtronic
  3. GlaxoSmithKline
  4. Ortho-McNeil Pharmaceutical
  5. American Heart Association Pharmaceutical Roundtable
  6. National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute
  7. Novartis
  8. Abbott
  9. Amarin
  10. AstraZeneca
  11. Bristol-Myers Squibb
  12. Chiesi Farmaceutici
  13. Eisai
  14. Ethicon
  15. Forest Laboratories
  16. Idorsia
  17. Ironwood
  18. Ischemix
  19. Eli Lilly and Company
  20. PhaseBio Pharmaceuticals
  21. Pfizer
  22. Regeneron
  23. Roche
  24. Sanofi
  25. Synaptics
  26. The Medicines Company
  27. Merck Co
  28. Luitpold
  29. Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute
  30. National Institutes of Health
  31. American Heart Association

Ask authors/readers for more resources

IMPORTANCE While 1 in 10 older patients hospitalized with heart failure (HF) die within 30 days, end-of-life care for this population is not well described. OBJECTIVE To assess rates of discharge to hospice, readmission after hospice, and survival in hospice in patients following hospital discharge. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS In this observational cohort analysis of patients in the multicenter American Heart Association Get With The Guidelines (GWTG)-HF registry linked to Medicare fee-for-service claims data, we analyzed patients 65 years and older discharged alive from the hospital between 2005 and 2014. We compared 4588 patients discharged to hospice with 4357 patients with advanced HF (ejection fraction <= 25% and any of the following: inpatient inotrope use, serum sodium level <= 130 mEq/L, blood urea nitrogen level >= 45 mg/dL [to convert to micromoles per liter, multiply by 0.357], systolic blood pressure mm Hg, or comfort measures during hospitalization) not discharged to hospice and with 113 045 other patients with HF in the GWTG-HF registry. Data were analyzed from October 2017 to June 2018. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES Discharge to hospice, rehospitalization, and mortality. RESULTS Of the 4588 patients discharged to hospice, 2556 (55.7%) were female and 4047 (88.2%) were white, and they had a median (interquartile range) age of 86 (80-90) years. Hospice accounted for 4588 of 121 990 discharges (3.8%), of which 2424 (52.8%) were discharges to home hospice and 2164 (47.2%) were to a hospice facility. Hospice discharges increased from 2.0% (109 of 5528) in 2005 to 4.9% (968 of 19 590) in 2014. Patients discharged to hospice were older, white, and more symptomatic compared with patients with advanced HF (n = 4357) and other patients in the GWTG-HF registry (n = 113 045). The median (interquartile range) postdischarge survival time in patients discharged to hospice was 11(3-63) days compared with 318 (78-1105) days in patients with advanced HF and 754 (221-1868) days in other patients in the GWTG-HF registry. A total of 739 patients (34.1%) discharged to hospice facilities died in less than 72 hours, while 295 (12.2%) discharged to home hospice died in less than 72 hours; 690 patients (15.0%) discharged from hospice lived for 6 months or more. Among hospitals with more than 25 hospice discharges, the median (interquartile range) hospice discharge rate was 3.5% (2.0%-5.7%). Readmission at 30 days was lower in patients discharged to hospice (189 [4.1%]) compared with patients with advanced HF (1185 [27.2%]) and others in the GWTG-HF registry (25 022 [22.2%]). Nonwhite race and younger age were the strongest predictors of readmission from hospice. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Hospice use has grown to about 4.9% of Medicare HF hospital discharges, with significant hospital-level variation. Almost a quarter of patients discharged to hospice die within 3 days of discharge, and about 4.1% of patients are readmitted to the hospital within 30 days.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available