Hospice Care for Patients with Dementia

Article Outline

• Abstract
• Introduction
• Methods
  • Data Sources
  • Study Population
  • Hospice Program Characteristics
  • FEHC
  • Analysis
• Results
  • Decedent Characteristics
  • Respondent Characteristics
  • Hospice Characteristics
  • Evaluation of Hospice Care
• Discussion
• Acknowledgments
• References
• Copyright

Abstract 

Dementia is a leading cause of death in the USA. Although guidelines exist to determine hospice eligibility for dementia, only a small percentage of patients dying with this condition receive hospice care. Hospice recipients with dementia have not been well characterized, and little is known about the quality of care they receive. The Family Evaluation of Hospice Care (FEHC) survey was adopted by the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization (NHPCO) in 2003 as a standard benchmarking tool. The FEHC collects data from bereaved families regarding the quality of hospice care. An online repository of 2005 FEHC data was used to describe hospice recipients over 65 years of age who died with dementia and to examine their families' evaluation of hospice care. Decedents with cancer and chronic terminal conditions were also analyzed for comparison purposes. A total of 77,123 surveys submitted by 796 hospices nationwide met the study's eligibility criteria. Decedent diagnoses were as follows: dementia, n=8,686 (11.3%); cancer, n=35,693 (46.3%); and other chronic diseases, n=32,744 (42.4%). Decedents with dementia were more likely to be >85 years, female, and have length of stays >180 days. Evaluation of care in all FEHC domains did not significantly differ between groups. Approximately three-quarters of bereaved family members of decedents in all groups perceived the overall quality of care as excellent; however, opportunities to improve care were also identified. These data suggest that the evaluation of hospice care for older patients is generally high, and does not vary with respect to terminal diagnoses.

Key Words: Hospice, dementia, satisfaction, family, survey

Back to Article Outline

Introduction 

In 2004, Alzheimer's disease was the fifth leading cause of death among Americans older than 65 years.¹ The mortality rate due to Alzheimer's disease is increasing faster than any other leading fatal condition.² Although recent initiatives have highlighted the need to improve end-of-life care, surprisingly little effort has focused on the growing number of Americans dying with dementia. A small, but emerging body of data suggests that the end-of-life experience of this population is not optimal.³, ⁴, ⁵

Hospice is a key provider of palliative care for Americans who are near the end of life. Dying patients and their families have been shown to benefit from hospice by experiencing better pain control, fewer terminal hospitalizations and invasive treatments, and greater overall satisfaction with end-of-life care.⁶, ⁷, ⁸, ⁹ Hospice was originally designed to care for persons dying with cancer, which remains the most common diagnosis among recipients. Prior reports indicate that only 1%–4% of hospice recipients in the community¹⁰ and 7%–16% in nursing homes have a primary diagnosis of dementia.⁶, ⁷, ¹¹ Several recognized barriers to hospice enrollment for dementia patients include challenges estimating six month prognosis,³, ¹², ¹³, ¹⁴, ¹⁵ lack of recognition of dementia as a terminal condition,³, ⁴, ¹⁶ and accessibility of hospice services in nursing homes.⁶, ⁷, ¹¹ In addition, the clinical problems encountered in advanced dementia are unique (i.e., symptom control in the cognitively impaired, behavior problems, reliance on substitute decision making). Whether or not hospice meets the specific palliative care needs in advanced dementia has not been well studied.

A first step toward improving hospice services for dementia patients is to better understand the quality of care hospices currently provide to this population. Prior work has demonstrated that families provide valuable feedback not only about the patients' dying experience, but also about their own experiences during this time.¹⁷ Thus, this study examined a repository of over 120,000 surveys collected nationwide in 2005 from bereaved family members' whose loved ones received hospice care at the end of life.¹⁸ The objectives were to characterize hospice recipients who died with dementia and to describe their family's evaluation of hospice care. Two comparative groups were identified to contrast the experience of dementia decedents to that of older persons with other common terminal illnesses, specifically cancer and end-stage chronic diseases (e.g., cardiovascular, pulmonary, and kidney disease).

Back to Article Outline

Methods 

The conduct of this study was approved by the Institutional Review Board at Hebrew SeniorLife.

Data Sources 

Data describing hospice decedents, their family members, and the family's experience with hospice care were obtained from Family Evaluation of Hospice Care (FEHC) surveys collected between January 1, 2005 through December 31, 2005 by the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization (NHPCO).¹⁸ The NHPCO is a nonprofit organization that represents 80% of hospices nationwide (≈3000). In 2003, the NHPCO adopted the FEHC as a standard tool for benchmarking and quality improvement purposes.¹⁸ The FEHC questionnaire examines the quality of hospice care from the bereaved family's perspective. Although the NHPCO has encouraged all hospices to implement the FEHC, participation is voluntary. Approximately, 819 hospices from 51 states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico used the FEHC in 2005 and contributed data to this study. FEHC data are collected either by an individual hospice or by a hired vendor. The latter method is preferred to encourage candid reporting. Family members are contacted one to three months after the patient's death to solicit their participation. Surveys are conducted by mail and take approximately 20 minutes to complete. The NHPCO maintains a web site for individual hospices to electronically submit their data to a common repository.

To compare the characteristics of hospice programs and recipients that participated in the FEHC survey with those from hospices nationwide, data were obtained from a published Medicare Payment Advisory Commission (MedPAC) report.¹⁹ This report included the following demographic characteristics describing 68,725 hospice recipients across the United States based on Medicare claims data: age, gender, race, and diagnosis (cancer vs. noncancer). In addition, the report describes features of approximately 2,895 US hospices in terms of type (i.e., freestanding, hospital-based, or home health agency) and profit vs. nonprofit status.

Study Population 

The study sample was identified and characterized using FEHC data provided by bereaved family members who responded to the survey. Respondents were asked to choose the primary illness leading to hospice referral from a list of diseases (i.e., close-ended question). Based on their responses, hospice recipients with the following conditions were selected: 1) dementia (Alzheimer's disease or other), 2) cancer (all types), and 3) chronic diseases. Chronic diseases included the following: heart and circulatory diseases, lung and breathing diseases, kidney diseases, liver diseases, strokes, and frailty/decline due to old age. Decedents whose primary reason for hospice referral was AIDS or unknown were excluded. As dementia primarily affects older persons, decedents younger than 65 years of age at the time of death were also excluded.

Other decedent characteristics obtained from the FEHC included age at death, gender, education (≥high school education), race (white vs. other), and length of hospice stay. For analytic purposes, decedent age was dichotomized at ≥85 years, and length of stay in hospice was categorized as follows: 0–7, 8–29, 30–180, and >180 days.

Respondent variables were also obtained from the FEHC survey, including age (14–44, 45–54, 55–64, 65–74, and ≥75 years), gender, education (≥high school education), and race (white vs. other). The FEHC asks respondents to identify their relationship to the decedent as one of the following: spouse, partner, child, parent, sibling, other relative, friend, or other. Based on the distribution of this variable, relationship to decedent was further categorized as spouse, child, or other for these analyses. Finally, respondents were asked to state whether they felt the timing of hospice referral was too early, at the right time, or too late.

Hospice Program Characteristics 

Individual hospices provide descriptive program information when they first access the NHPCO web site to submit FEHC data and are prompted to update this information each time they submit data. Several hospice characteristics obtained from the FEHC database were used in this study. The type of hospice was categorized as freestanding, hospital-based, home health agency-based, or other (e.g., health care plan, Veteran's Administration, prison). Hospices were designated as for profit or not for profit. Location was categorized as either rural or urban by linking hospice zip codes with the 2005 Area Resource File (ARF).²⁰ The ARF is a county-based national health resource information database that provides an urban/rural designation for regions throughout the United States.

The average daily census for each hospice was provided on a quarterly basis. Census data reported in the second quarter of 2005 were arbitrarily chosen for these analyses and categorized as follows: <50, 51–100, 101–250, and >250 hospice recipients. The volume of dementia patients served by the individual hospices was estimated by calculating the proportion of all decedents who had a primary diagnosis of dementia based on the FEHC survey responses. The volume of dementia patients was dichotomized as ≥10%, as this value included approximately half of all hospices.

Finally, the survey response rate was reported at each quarter by the hospices (i.e., proportion of mailed surveys that were completed and returned by respondents). For these analyses, a mean annual response rate was calculated for each hospice by averaging the four quarterly response rates in 2005. Hospices whose mean annual survey response rate was <20% were excluded, as the investigators considered this value to be a reasonably low threshold of survey response to warrant exclusion (n=23 hospices). The main outcomes of the study were then examined using several cutoff values for mean annual response rates (i.e., 20%, 30%, 40%, 50%, and 60%). Given that the main findings of the study did not differ based on these cut-points, all hospices with response rates >20% were included. However, hospice annual survey response rate was also analyzed as a covariate and categorized based on tertiles: 20%–38%, 39%–41%, and >41%.

FEHC 

The FEHC survey is a modified version of the original After-Death Family Interview, a validated instrument measuring key palliative care outcomes based on a patient-focused, family-centered conceptual model.¹⁷, ²¹ The FEHC survey contains 61 close-ended questions that are grouped into domains that can be administered separately and maintain psychometric integrity. Details of the FEHC survey contents and scoring scheme are described elsewhere.¹⁸ For the purposes of this study, the following domains were examined as follows: 1) coordination of care, 2) attending to family needs for information, 3) attending to family needs for support, and 4) provision of physical comfort and emotional support to the patient. In addition, a single question asked respondents to rate overall hospice care as being excellent, very good, good, fair, or poor.

Problem scores were used to quantify three domains: coordination of care, attending to family needs for information, and attending to family needs for emotional support. Problem scores sum the negative responses for a set of questions within a domain. Thus, higher problem scores represent more opportunities to improve care. For example, the coordination of care domain consisted of three questions, with a possible range of scores from 0 to 3. These three questions were the following: 1) how often did the family get confusing or contradictory information (always, usually, sometimes, or never) (a response of “always” or “usually” gets one point); 2) was one nurse identified as being in charge (yes/no), (a response of “no” gets one point); and 3) was there a problem with hospice doctors or nurses not knowing enough about the patient's history (yes/no) (a response of “no” gets one point).

The domain examining the information needs of the family consisted of two separate problem scores: 1) information provided about the patient's condition and what to expect during the dying process (two questions; problem score range 0–2), and 2) information provided about the treatment of symptoms (four questions; problem score range 0–4). The domain examining the emotional needs of the family included four questions, with a possible problem score range of 0–4. All problem scores were dichotomized in the analyses into 0 vs. ≥1 (i.e., at least one problem) because the majority of respondents did not report any problems.

The domains examining the provision of physical comfort and emotional support to the patient examined whether or not the patient had unmet needs for three distressing symptoms: pain, dyspnea, and anxiety/sadness. For each symptom, respondents were asked whether the treatment provided to the patient was less than what was wanted, just the right amount, or more than what was wanted. In these analyses, an unmet need was defined as receiving less or more treatment than was wanted (i.e., undesirable), as opposed to just the right amount of treatment (desirable).

Analysis 

The decedent was the unit of analyses throughout the study. Frequencies were used to describe the decedent characteristics, respondent characteristics, features of the hospice programs, and evaluation of hospice care using the aforementioned domains from the FEHC survey. Frequencies were calculated for all eligible decedents, as well as stratified by the three decedent groups (i.e., dementia, cancer, and chronic diseases). Chi-squared tests were used to detect statistically significant differences in decedent, respondent, and hospice program characteristics among the three groups. Mantel-Haenszel tests were used to determine if statistical differences among groups were present in the analyses examining the FEHC domains as outcome measures. However, due to the large sample size and potential for Type I errors, only proportions that differed by 5% between groups were considered clinically meaningful.

Although the proportion of missing values varied for each independent variable, the distribution of missing values for each variable did not significantly differ across disease groups. Several reasons accounted for these missing values, including the following: respondents did not answer a question; individual hospices chose not to include a particular set of questions in the survey; and the existence of logical skip patterns within the survey, primarily for the domain assessing unmet patient needs. For example, in reference to the logical skip patterns, if a decedent did not experience pain, then the respondent was instructed to skip the question about unmet needs for pain control. The proportion of missing values for the three variables assessing unmet needs were as follows: pain, 21%; dyspnea, 48%; and anxiety/sadness, 58%. In addition, several hospices opted not to include respondent demographic questions in the survey; thus, approximately 28% of responses to these questions were missing. The proportion of missing values ranged from 0% to 11% for the remaining variables.

Back to Article Outline

Results 

There were 121,817 FEHC surveys submitted in 2005 to the NHPCO web site. Table 1 presents the characteristics of the hospice recipients and programs represented in this sample compared to those described in a recent nationwide MedPAC report. Hospice recipients <65 years comprised a greater proportion of hospice recipients in the survey cohort compared to the national sample (15.1 vs. 5.1%); however, this age group was excluded from our analyses. In addition, while all hospice recipients in this study were deceased, only 82.7% of those in the MedPAC sample had died. Otherwise, demographic features of the hospice programs and recipients who contributed data to the FEHC surveys were comparable to those in the MedPAC report.

Table 1. Comparison of Hospice Recipient and Program Characteristics Among Family Evaluation of Hospice Care Survey Respondents with Medicare Hospice Claims²¹

	Survey Respondents	Medicare Hospice Claimsa
Patient characteristics (%)	(n=121,817)	(n=68,725)
Age (years)
<65	15.1	5.1
65–74	17.2	21.1
75–84	32.5	37.9
≥85	35.1	35.9
Female	54.3	57.6
White	93.0	89.5
Diagnoses
Cancer	49.6	42.5
Noncancer	50.4	57.6
Died	100.0	82.7
Program characteristics	(n=819)	(n=2,895)
Type (%)
Freestanding	63.0	57.0
Hospital	23.0	19.0
Home health agency	10.8	22.4
Other	3.2	1.6
For profit (%)	30.0	46.0

From among the 121,817 available surveys, n=611 (0.5%) were excluded because they were received from hospices with an annual response rate below 20% (n=23/819 hospices). After excluding decedents younger than 65 years of age (n=16,458), those who died from AIDS (n=217), and those for whom the primary diagnosis for hospice referral was unknown (n=26,299), 77,123 surveys were available for analyses (n=109 subjects were excluded for more than one reason). The primary illnesses leading to hospice referral among these 77,123 decedents were: dementia, n=8,686 (11.3%); cancer, n=35,693 (46.3%); and other chronic diseases, n=32,744 (42.4%).

Decedent Characteristics 

Several characteristics differentiated hospice recipients with dementia from those with cancer and chronic diseases (Table 2). The proportion of decedents older than 85 years was significantly greater in the dementia group (57.2%) compared to the cancer group (23.1%). Hospice recipients with dementia were also more likely to be female (68.9%) compared to those dying with cancer (49.3%) and chronic diseases (58.8%). In addition, a significantly greater proportion of decedents with a primary diagnosis of dementia had a length of stay exceeding 180 days (13.7%), compared to those with cancer (5.3%) and chronic diseases (8.5%). Race and education did not meaningfully differ among groups (i.e., >5.0%), with the majority of all decedents being white and having at least a high school education.

Table 2. Decedent, Family, and Hospice Program Characteristics for Hospice Decedents >65 years with Dementia (n=8,686), Cancer (n=35,693), and Chronic Diseases (n=32,744)^a

	Decedent Group
	All (n=77,123)	Dementia (n=8,686)	Cancer (n=35,693)	Chronic Diseaseb (n=32,744)
Decedent characteristics (%)
Age, >85 years	40.0	57.2	23.1	53.8
Female (%)	44.5	68.9	49.3	58.8
Education, ≥high school	69.9	69.6	73.1	66.5
White race	93.9	94.0	93.2	94.6
Length of hospice stay (days)
0–7	31.8	27.9	26.5	38.5
8–29	26.5	24.3	28.9	24.5
30–180	34.1	34.0	39.3	28.5
>180	7.6	13.7	5.3	8.5
Family characteristics
Age (years)
14–44	7.4	5.2	8.9	6.2
45–54	19.6	19.3	20.4	18.8
55–64	27.6	32.8	22.9	31.4
65–74	23.9	20.5	25.6	22.9
≥75	21.5	22.3	22.1	20.7
Female	73.4	69.7	73.4	74.2
Education, ≥high school	91.6	93.7	91.0	91.8
White race (vs. other)	94.1	94.4	93.5	94.6
Relationship to patient
Spouse	35.6	26.5	45.2	27.6
Child	45.7	53.3	38.2	51.9
Other	18.6	20.2	16.6	20.5
Feels timing of hospice referral was
Too early	1.3	1.6	1.2	1.2
About right	88.0	86.9	88.8	87.3
Too late	11.7	11.5	10.0	11.5
Hospice characteristics
Average daily census
<50	18.0	14.5	19.1	17.8
51–100	28.0	32.2	26.7	28.2
101–250	28.1	26.9	27.8	28.7
>250	25.9	26.4	26.4	25.3
For profit	13.8	22.9	10.8	14.6
Urban (vs. rural)	87.1	90.2	86.5	87.0
Volume of dementia patients, >10%	55.8	72.2	51.1	56.6
Mean annual survey response rate
20–38	29.2	34.5	27.9	29.3
38–41	34.2	32.0	34.7	34.1
>41	36.8	33.5	37.4	36.6
Type
Freestanding	62.1	69.7	60.1	62.3
Hospital	24.2	19.0	25.6	24.0
Home health agency	9.5	7.5	10.2	9.4
Other	4.2	3.8	4.1	4.3

Respondent Characteristics 

The characteristics of survey respondents were comparable among all three decedent groups with respect to age, gender, education, and race (Table 2). The relationship of the respondents to the hospice recipients was similar between the dementia and chronic disease groups, such that slightly more than half were the decedents' children, and one-quarter were spouses. In contrast, survey respondents in the cancer group were more likely to be spouses (45.2%), and less likely to be children (38.2%). The respondents' perception regarding the timing of hospice referral was similar across all groups; the majority felt the timing was about right (88.0%), 1.3% felt it was too early, and 10.8% felt the referral occurred too late.

Hospice Characteristics 

Decedents with dementia were more likely to receive care from for-profit (22.9%) and freestanding (69.9%) hospices compared to those dying with cancer (for profit, 10.8%; freestanding, 60.1%) and chronic diseases (for profit, 14.6%; freestanding 62.3%) (Table 2). In contrast, hospice recipients with cancer and chronic diseases were more likely to be in hospital-based hospices. Not surprisingly, subjects dying with dementia also had a higher likelihood of being cared for by hospices in which the volume of dementia decedents exceeded 10%. The hospices' average daily census, location (i.e., urban vs. rural), and mean annual survey response rates were similar among all three decedent groups.

Evaluation of Hospice Care 

The majority of survey respondents rated overall hospice care as excellent regardless of the decedents' primary diagnoses (dementia, 73.2%; cancer, 77.9%; and chronic conditions, 75.6%) (Table 3). Similar proportions of respondents in all groups reported at least one problem with coordination of care (17.5%), information received from health care providers regarding the patients' overall condition (20.1%), information received about treatment of the patients' symptoms (12.2%), and the provision of emotional support to the family (29.8%). Unmet patient needs for the treatment of symptoms were less frequent, and also comparable in all decedent groups (pain, 5.5%; dyspnea, 4.7%, and anxiety/sadness, 9.3%).

Table 3. Family Evaluation of Hospice Care Survey Domains for Hospice Decedents >65 years Dying with Dementia (n=8,686), Cancer (n=35,693), and Chronic Diseases (n=32,744)

	Decedent Group (%)
Domain	All (n=77,123)	Dementia (n=8,686)	Cancer (n=35,693)	Chronic Diseasea (n=32,744)	P-valueb
Overall hospice care
Excellent	76.4	73.3	77.9	75.7	0.37
Very good	18.0	20.6	16.8	18.8
Good	4.0	4.3	3.7	4.1
Fair	1.0	1.2	1.0	0.9
Poor	0.6	0.6	0.6	0.5
Coordination of care
At least one problem	17.5	17.4	17.4	17.6	0.74
Information provided by health care providers
Patient's condition/what to expect
At least one problem	20.1	19.8	20.2	20.0	0.90
Treatment of symptoms
At least one problem	12.2	13.8	11.4	12.7	0.48
Emotional support for family
At least one problem	29.8	29.3	28.7	31.2	<0.0001
Unmet patient needs
Pain	5.5	3.9	6.0	5.2	0.60
Dyspnea	4.7	4.5	5.1	4.4	0.09
Emotional	9.3	7.7	9.5	9.2	0.49

Back to Article Outline

Discussion 

In this nationwide study, while only 11% of hospice decedents had dementia, their families' evaluation of hospice care was similar to that experienced for more common hospice diagnoses (i.e., cancer and chronic end-stage organ failure). Although the majority of respondents rated hospice care as excellent, problems with specific services were not infrequent. For example, approximately one in three families expressed a concern regarding the emotional support they received from hospice providers, and one in five felt they were not adequately informed about what to expect during the dying process. These findings not only demonstrate that the quality of hospice care for terminally ill older patients and their families is perceived to be high, regardless of diagnosis, but also that opportunities for improvement exist.

Comparability of this study to prior reports describing hospice recipients, and specifically those with dementia, is limited because much of this earlier work was done before 2005,¹¹ includes patients receiving ongoing hospice care (i.e., not only decedents), examines selected settings (i.e., community or nursing home), and is restricted to specific regions in the United States.⁶, ⁷, ¹⁰, ¹¹ Nonetheless, the characteristics of the hospice decedents and programs in this sample were similar to those described in a recent MedPAC report for Medicare beneficiaries nationwide.¹⁹ In particular, our study confirms that dementia, compared to cancer, remains a far less common terminal condition among older hospice decedents, despite the publication of specific hospice eligibility guidelines for noncancer diagnoses in 1996.²² However, our findings also support observations indicating a steady increase in end-stage dementia as a primary diagnosis leading to hospice referral over the past decade.²³ For example, two large studies from 1990 found that only 1%–4% of hospice enrollees had dementia,¹⁰, ¹³ as compared to 11% in our sample.

To be eligible for hospice, patients must have an estimated life expectancy of less than six months.²² Prognostication is particularly challenging in end-stage dementia, such that this requirement has hindered access and appropriate timing of hospice referrals for dementia patients.³, ¹², ¹³, ¹⁴ The final stage of dementia also tends to be longer compared to terminal cancer. Thus, we found, as have others, that hospice stays exceeding 180 days were significantly more common among hospice decedents with dementia.⁹, ¹⁰, ²⁴ Miller et al. reported that 12% of nursing home hospice recipients with dementia had lengths of stay greater than 210 days compared to only 9% of those with cancer.²⁴ While long length of stays may be problematic from the perspective of hospice providers,¹³, ¹⁵ it is notable that in our study only 1.6% of family members of dementia decedents felt that hospice referral occurred too early, which was comparable to the other disease groups.

Approximately 70% of Americans older than 65 years with dementia die in nursing homes, as compared to only 21% of those dying with cancer, and 28% with other chronic diseases.²⁵ Moreover, the proportion of hospice recipients with dementia in the nursing home setting exceeds that in the community.⁶, ⁷, ¹⁰, ¹¹ The FEHC survey does not identify the site of hospice care. However, it is reasonable to assume that dementia decedents in our sample were more likely to be cared for by for profit and freestanding hospices, because these organizational features tend to be more common among hospices that provide services in nursing homes compared to those that do not.²⁶

Several prior reports confirm that families' overall evaluation of hospice care is generally high.¹⁷, ²⁷, ²⁸ Bekelman extended this observation to dementia patients.⁹ However, no prior study known to us has directly compared satisfaction with hospice care for dementia to other decedent groups.⁹ Our findings are encouraging as they suggest that hospice providers are able to meet the unique challenges of end-of-life care in dementia, at least as well as they do for the more common diagnoses among hospice recipients. However, this study further underscores opportunities for hospice to better address the needs of patients and families. Similar to Teno et al.,¹⁷ we found that the most frequent areas of concern among bereaved family members include the need for better emotional support, coordination of care, and information about what to expect during the dying process.

This study has limitations that deserve comment. First, while the data were obtained from over 800 hospices nationwide, not all US hospice providers use the FEHC instrument. Nonetheless, the characteristics of the hospice decedents and programs in this sample were comparable to those reported in other nationwide data sets, thus minimizing the potential bias introduced by the exclusion of nonparticipant hospices.¹⁹ Second, the survey response rate varied among participating programs. However, the main findings of this study were not altered when various cutoff thresholds for annual hospice response rates were applied, and response rates did not differ by disease group. Third, FEHC items had varying proportions of missing values. The percentage of missing values for each variable was equally distributed across the three disease groups, and thus, an unlikely source of significant bias. Finally, the site of hospice care (i.e., nursing home, home) was not available. It is reasonable to assume that a larger proportion of dementia decedents received hospice services in nursing homes. However, it is unlikely that site of care was a confounder in the analyses because the main outcome measures did not differ across disease groups.

Hospice services have been shown to be beneficial for persons dying with dementia,⁶, ⁷, ⁹, ²⁹ and our findings further demonstrate that satisfaction with these services is comparable to other terminal conditions. Nonetheless, a relatively small proportion of persons dying with advanced dementia receive hospice care. Thus, our results suggest that current hospice care appears to manage the specific problems in end-stage dementia with reasonable success as perceived by family members, and support efforts toward improving the delivery and quality of hospice services to the growing number of Americans dying with dementia.

Back to Article Outline

Acknowledgments 

The authors wish to acknowledge Alison Petrilla of the National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization for her assistance with data management.

Back to Article Outline

References 

1. National Vital Statistics Report . Death, preliminary data for 2004. Available from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr54/nvsr54_19.pdfAccessed August 15, 2006
   • View In Article
2. Hebert LE, Scherr PA, Bienias JL, Bennett DA, Evans DA. Alzheimer's Disease in the US population: prevalence estimates using the 2000 Census. Arch Neurol. 2003;60:1119–1122
   • View In Article
   • MEDLINE
   • CrossRef
3. Sachs GA, Shega JW, Cox-Haley D. Barriers to excellent end-of-life care for patients with dementia. J Gen Intern Med. 2004;19:1057–1063
   • View In Article
   • MEDLINE
   • CrossRef
4. Mitchell SL, Kiely DK, Hamel MB. Dying with advanced dementia in the nursing home. Arch Intern Med. 2004;164:321–326
   • View In Article
   • MEDLINE
   • CrossRef
5. Mitchell SL, Morris JN, Park PS, Fries BE. Terminal care for persons with advanced dementia in the nursing home and home care settings. J Pall Med. 2004;7:808–816
   • View In Article
6. Miller SC, Gozalo P, Mor V. Hospice enrollment and hospitalization of dying nursing home patients. Am J Med. 2001;111:38–44
   • View In Article
   • Abstract
   • Full Text
   • Full-Text PDF (124 KB)
   • CrossRef
7. Miller SC, Mor V, Wu N, Gozola P, Lapane K. Does receipt of hospice care in nursing homes improve the management of pain at the end-of-life?. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2002;50:507–515
   • View In Article
8. Kane RL, Berstein L, Wales J, et al. Hospice effectiveness in controlling pain. JAMA. 1985;253:2683–2686
   • View In Article
   • MEDLINE
9. Bekelman DB, Black BS, Shore AD, Kasper JD, Rabins PV. Hospice care in a cohort of elders with dementia and mild cognitive impairment. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2005;30:208–214
   • View In Article
   • Abstract
   • Full Text
   • Full-Text PDF (92 KB)
   • CrossRef
10. Christakis NA, Escarce JJ. Survival of Medicare patients after enrollment in hospice programs. N Engl J Med. 1996;335:172–178
    • View In Article
11. Casarett DJ, Hirschman KB, Henry MR. Does hospice have a role in nursing home care at the end-of-life?. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2001;49:1493–1498
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
12. Mitchell SL, Kiely DK, Hamel MB, Park PS, Morris JN. Estimating prognosis for nursing home residents with advanced dementia. JAMA. 2004;291:2734–2740
    • View In Article
    • CrossRef
13. Hanrahan P, Luchins DJ. Access to hospice programs in end-stage dementia: a national survey of hospice programs. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1995;43:56–59
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
14. Luchins DJ, Hanrahan P, Murphy K. Criteria for enrolling dementia patients in hospice. J Am Geriatr Soc. 1997;45:1054–1059
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
15. Brickner L, Scannell K, Marquet S, Ackerson L. Barriers to hospice care and referrals: survey of physicians' knowledge, attitudes, and perceptions in a health maintenance organization. J Pall Med. 2004;7:411–418
    • View In Article
16. Morrison RS, Siu AL. Survival in end-stage dementia following acute illness. JAMA. 2000;284:47–52
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
17. Teno JM, Clarridge BR, Casey V, et al. Family perspectives on end-of-life care at the last place of care. JAMA. 2004;291:88–93
    • View In Article
    • CrossRef
18. Connor SR, Teno JM, Spence C, Smith N. Family evaluation of hospice care: results from a voluntary submission of data via website. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2005;30:4–17
    • View In Article
    • Full Text
    • Full-Text PDF (36 KB)
    • CrossRef
19. MedPAC . Medicare's hospice benefit: recent trends and consideration of payment system refinements. In: Report to the Congress: Increasing the Value of Medicare. 2006;Available from http://www.medpac.gov/publications/congressional_reports/Jun06_Ch03.pdfAccessed May 7, 2007
    • View In Article
20. Area Resource File (ARF) . US Department of Health and Human Services, Health Resources and Services Administration, Bureau of Health Professions. Rockville, MD: Department of Health and Human Services; 2005;88–93
    • View In Article
21. Teno JM, Clarridge B, Casey V, Edgman-Levitan S, Fowler J. Validation of the toolkit after-death bereaved family member interview. J Pain Symptom Manage. 2001;22:752–758
    • View In Article
22. National Hospice Organization . Medical guidelines for determining prognosis in selected non-cancer diseases. 2nd ed.. Arlington, VA: NHPCO; 1996;
    • View In Article
23. Characteristics of hospice care discharges and their length of service: United States, 2000. Series Report 13, No. 154. 44 pp. (PHS) 2003–1725. Available from http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/03facts/hospicecare.htm. Accessed September 13, 2006.
    • View In Article
24. Miller SC, Gozalo P, Mor V. Use of Medicare's Hospice Benefit by nursing facility residents. In: Synthesis and analysis of Medicare's Hospice Benefit. Washington, DC: Office of Disability, Aging, and Long-Term Care Policy in the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation, US Department of Health and Human Services; 2000;
    • View In Article
25. Mitchell SL, Teno JM, Miller SC, Mor V. A national study of the location of death for older persons with dementia. J Am Geriatr Soc. 2005;53:299–305
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
26. Gozalo PL, Miller SC. Hospice enrollment and evaluation of its causal effects on hospitalization of dying nursing home patients. Health Serv Res. 2007;42:587–610
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
    • CrossRef
27. Miceli PJ, Mylod DE. Satisfaction of families using end-of-life care: current successes and challenges in the hospice industry. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2003;20:360–370
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
28. Steele LL, Mills B, Long MR, Hagopian GA. Patient and caregiver satisfaction with end-of-life: does high satisfaction mean high quality of care?. Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2002;19:19–27
    • View In Article
    • MEDLINE
29. Miller SC, Gozalo P, Mor V. Outcomes and utilization for hospice and non-hospice nursing facility decedents. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of Disability and Long-Term Care Policy, and the Urban Institute research studies; 2000;Available at http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/home.htm
    • View In Article