"Goals of Care Conversations Don't Fit in a Box": Hospice Staff Experiences and Perceptions of Advance Care Planning Quality Measurement

Lauren J Hunt; Sarah B Garrett; Gabrielle Dressler; Rebecca Sudore; Christine S Ritchie; Krista L Harrison

doi:10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2020.09.042

"Goals of Care Conversations Don't Fit in a Box": Hospice Staff Experiences and Perceptions of Advance Care Planning Quality Measurement

J Pain Symptom Manage. 2021 May;61(5):917-927. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2020.09.042. Epub 2020 Oct 20.

Authors

Lauren J Hunt¹, Sarah B Garrett², Gabrielle Dressler³, Rebecca Sudore⁴, Christine S Ritchie⁵, Krista L Harrison²

Affiliations

¹ Department of Physiological Nursing, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA. Electronic address: Lauren.hunt@ucsf.edu.
² Division of Geriatrics, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA; Philip R. Lee Institute for Health Policy Studies, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA.
³ Warren Alpert Medical School, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
⁴ Division of Geriatrics, University of California, San Francisco, California, USA; San Francisco Veterans Affairs Medical Center, San Francisco, California, USA.
⁵ The Mongan Institute and the Division of Palliative Care and Geriatric Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts, USA.

Abstract

Context: With rising concerns about quality of care in hospice, federal agencies recently began mandating quality measurement in hospice, including measures of advance care planning (ACP).

Objectives: To characterize hospice providers' experiences with ACP quality measurement and their reflections on ways to improve it.

Methods: Semi-structured in-depth interviews of fifty-one hospice providers from various clinical backgrounds and organizational roles in four geographically diverse non-profit, community-based hospices in the U.S. Participants were queried about their experiences with and barriers to ACP quality measurement processes in their organization, opinions about the impacts of federally mandated quality measures, and ideas for improvement. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis with an interdisciplinary team, facilitated by ATLAS.ti and Excel.

Results: Four key findings of the ACP quality measurement experience for hospice staff included variation, barriers, attitudes, and recommendations for improvement. 1) Variation: Within and across organizations, participants applied a variety of processes to measure ACP quality, and exposure to and experiences with quality measurement varied based on organizational role. 2) Barriers: ACP quality measurement was impeded by limited resources, technological problems, and measurement challenges. 3) Attitudes: Participants' opinions of recently implemented federally mandated requirements for ACP quality measurement highlighted numerous downsides, unintended consequences, and few upsides. 4) Recommendations: improvements included personalizing ACP quality measures, elevating the importance of quality measurement, and streamlining processes.

Conclusion: Hospice staff take ACP quality measurement seriously, but insufficient organizational resources and regulatory bureaucracy create challenges. Efforts to enhance ACP quality measure nuance and assess outcomes are needed to improve care.

Keywords: Hospice; advance care planning; quality improvement; quality measurement.

Publication types

Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

Advance Care Planning*
Communication
Hospice Care*
Hospices*
Humans
Perception

Abstract

Publication types

MeSH terms

Grants and funding