Dataset Information

An advance care planning long-term care initiative in response to COVID-19.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Describe a systematic approach to address advance care planning (ACP) during a COVID-19 outbreak and its impact on the incidence of new do-not-hospitalize (DNH) directives among long-term care (LTC) residents.

Design

Prospective quality improvement initiative.

Setting

Two long-term chronic care campuses within a large academic healthcare organization.

Participants

LTC residents with activated healthcare proxies who lacked DNH directives based on documentation in the electronic medical record (EMR) as of April 13, 2020.

Intervention

Using a structured discussion guide, trained healthcare staff from various disciplines contacted the residents' proxies to conduct COVID-19 focused ACP discussions. Residents without DNH directives with COVID-19 were prioritized. Preferences ascertained in the discussion were communicated to the residents' primary care teams and directives were updated in the EMR accordingly.

Measurements

Residents who acquired a new DNH directive during the study initiative were determined using the EMR. Subsequent changes in DNH orders, hospitalizations, and deaths were ascertained by retrospective chart review from the date of new DNH through August 5, 2020.

Results

At baseline, 315/581 (54%) of LTC residents did not have a DNH directive. Their mean age was 87 (±9) years and 70% were female. Following ACP discussions, 124/315 (39%) of residents acquired a new DNH directive. Among residents with new DNH directives, 65/124 (52%) were diagnosed with COVID-19 from April 2, 2020 to May 21, 2020. During follow-up, only 6/124 (4.8%) residents had their DNH order reversed, 2/124 (1.6%) residents were hospitalized with illnesses unrelated to COVID-19, and 29/124 (23%) died.

Conclusions

There was substantial opportunity to increase the proportion of LTC residents with DNH orders during the COVID-19 pandemic through a systematic ACP initiative which utilized real-time EMR data. New directives to avoid hospitalizations were sustained among the majority of residents beyond the peak of the pandemic.

SUBMITTER: Berning MJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8013602 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe COVID-19 pandemic has presented new challenges surrounding end-of-life planning and has been associated with increased online discussion about life support.Research questionHow has online communication about advance care planning (ACP) and specific life-sustaining interventions (LSIs) changed during the pandemic?Study design and methodsConversations on Twitter containing references to LSIs (eg, "ECMO") or ACP (eg, "DNR/DNI") were collected between January 2019 and May 2021. User account metadata were used to predict user demographic information and to classify users as organizations, individuals, clinicians, or influencers. The number of impressions was compared across these user categories and the content of tweets analyzed by using natural language processing models to identify topics of discussion and associated emotional sentiment.ResultsThere were 202,585 unique tweets about LSIs and 67,162 unique tweets about ACP. Users who were younger, male, or influencers were more likely to discuss LSIs online. Tweets about LSIs were associated with more positive emotional sentiment scores than tweets about ACP (LSIs, 0.3; ACP, -0.2; P < .001). Among tweets about ACP, most contained personal experiences related to the death of loved ones (27%) or discussed discrimination through do-not-resuscitate orders directed at the elderly and disabled (19%). Personal experiences had the greatest retweet-to-tweet-ratio (4.7), indicating high levels of user engagement. Tweets about discrimination contained the most negative net sentiment score (-0.5).InterpretationThe observed increase in tweets regarding LSIs and ACP suggests that Twitter was consistently used to discuss treatment modalities and preferences related to intensive care during the pandemic. Future interventions to increase online engagement with ACP may consider leveraging influencers and personal stories. Finally, we identified do-not-resuscitate-related discrimination as a commonly held public fear, which should be further explored as a barrier to ACP completion and can be proactively addressed by clinicians during bedside goals-of-care discussions.

Project description:Background/objectiveAdvance 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.DesignWe 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.SettingNational Medicare FFS.ParticipantsA total of 1.3 million Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 years and older.MeasurementReceipt 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).ResultsThe 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.ConclusionIn 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.