Dementia diagnosis and utilization patterns in a racially diverse population within an integrated health care delivery system.

Introduction: In an effort to identify improvement opportunities for earlier dementia detection and care within a large, integrated health care system serving diverse Medicare Advantage (MA) beneficiaries, we examined where, when, and by whom Alzheimer's disease and related dementias (ADRD) diagnoses are recorded as well as downstream health care utilization and life care planning. Methods: Patients 65 years and older, continuously enrolled in the Kaiser Foundation health plan for at least 2 years, and with a first ADRD diagnosis between January 1, 2015, and December 31, 2018, comprised the incident cohort. Electronic health record data were used to identify site and source of the initial diagnosis (clinic vs hospital-based, provider type), health care utilization in the year before and after diagnosis, and end-of-life care. Results: ADRD prevalence was 5.5%. A total of 25,278 individuals had an incident ADRD code (rate: 1.2%) over the study period-nearly half during a hospital-based encounter. Hospital-diagnosed patients had higher comorbidities, acute care use before and after diagnosis, and 1-year mortality than clinic-diagnosed individuals (36% vs 11%). Many decedents (58%-72%) received palliative care or hospice. Of the 55% diagnosed as outpatients, nearly two-thirds were diagnosed by dementia specialists; when used, standardized cognitive assessments indicated moderate stage ADRD. Despite increases in advance care planning and visits to dementia specialists in the year after diagnosis, acute care use also increased for both clinic- and hospital-diagnosed cohorts. Discussion: Similar to other MA plans, ADRD is under-diagnosed in this health system, compared to traditional Medicare, and diagnosed well beyond the early stages, when opportunities to improve overall outcomes are presumed to be better. Dementia specialists function primarily as consultants whose care does not appear to mitigate acute care use. Strategic targets for ADRD care improvement could focus on generating pragmatic evidence on the value of proactive detection and tracking, care planning, and the role of specialists in chronic care management.

Refining the Definition of Polypharmacy and Its Link to Disability in Older Adults: Conceptualizing Necessary Polypharmacy, Unnecessary Polypharmacy, and Polypharmacy of Unclear Benefit.

The term polypharmacy in older adults is generally used in a pejorative context in the medical literature. Because of its link to geriatric syndromes and disability, the avoidance of polypharmacy is usually recommended in older adults as a strategy to optimize functional status. However, there are many polypharmacy regimens based on high-quality trials that clearly reduce the risk of disability in older adults. Other guidelines for older adults recommend the use of additional medications that may or may not be evidence based and that may or may not reduce disability. Therefore, we propose that, in the geriatric literature, polypharmacy now be categorized as "necessary polypharmacy," "unnecessary polypharmacy," or "polypharmacy of unclear benefit." In this article, we discuss the 3 categories of polypharmacy and give examples on each polypharmacy regimen and its potential relationship to disability in older adults.

End-of-Life Care in Patients Exposed to Home-Based Palliative Care vs Hospice Only.

OBJECTIVES: The current evidence base regarding the effectiveness of home-based palliative care (HomePal) on outcomes of importance to multiple stakeholders remains limited. The purpose of this study was to compare end-of-life care in decedents who received HomePal with two cohorts that either received hospice only (HO) or did not receive HomePal or hospice (No HomePal-HO). DESIGN: Retrospective cohorts from an ongoing study of care transition from hospital to home. Data were collected from 2011 to 2016. SETTING: Kaiser Permanente Southern California. PARTICIPANTS: Decedents 65 and older who received HomePal (n = 7177) after a hospitalization and two comparison cohorts (HO only = 25 102; No HomePal-HO = 22 472). MEASUREMENTS: Utilization data were extracted from administrative, clinical, and claims databases, and death data were obtained from state and national indices. Days at home was calculated as days not spent in the hospital or in a skilled nursing facility (SNF). RESULTS: Patients who received HomePal were enrolled for a median of 43 days and had comparable length of stay on hospice as patients who enrolled only in hospice (median days = 13 vs 12). Deaths at home were comparable between HomePal and HO (59% vs 60%) and were higher compared with No HomePal-HO (16%). For patients who survived at least 6 months after HomePal admission (n = 2289), the mean number of days at home in the last 6 months of life was 163 ± 30 vs 161 ± 30 (HO) vs 149 ± 40 (No HomePal-HO). Similar trends were also noted for the last 30 days of life, 25 ± 8 (HomePal, n = 5516), 24 ± 8 (HO), and 18 ± 11 (No HomePal-HO); HomePal patients had a significantly lower risk of hospitalizations (relative risk [RR] = .58-.87) and SNF stays (RR = .32-.77) compared with both HO and No HomePal-HO patients. CONCLUSION: Earlier comprehensive palliative care in patients' home in place of or preceding hospice is associated with fewer hospitalizations and SNF stays and more time at home in the final 6 months of life. J Am Geriatr Soc, 2019.

Impact of Inpatient Palliative Care on Quality of End-of-Life Care and Downstream Acute and Postacute Care Utilization.

BACKGROUND: Additional evidence is needed regarding the impact of inpatient palliative care (IPC) on the quality of end-of-life care and downstream utilization. AIM: Examine the effects of IPC on quality of end-of-life care and acute and postacute care use in a large integrated system. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort design. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Adult decedents from January 1, 2012, to December 31, 2014, who had at least one hospitalization at 11 Kaiser Permanente Southern California medical centers in the 12 months before death and not hospitalized for a trauma-related condition or receiving home-based PC or hospice were included in the cohort. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Inverse probability of treatment weighting of propensity scores was used to compare outcomes between patients exposed to IPC (n = 3742) and controls (n = 12,755) who never received IPC before death. RESULTS: Patients who received IPC were more likely to enroll in home-based PC or hospice (69% vs. 43%) and were less likely to die in a hospital (15% vs. 29%) or intensive care (2% vs. 9%) compared with controls (all, p < 0.001). IPC exposure was associated with higher risk for rehospitalization (HR: 1.18, 95% CI 1.11-1.25) and more frequent emergency department visits (RR: 1.16, 95% CI 1.07-1.26) with no increase in postacute care use compared with controls. Stratified analyses showed that IPC effects on acute care utilization were dependent on code status. CONCLUSION: IPC exposure was associated with higher enrollment in home-based PC/hospice and more deaths at home. The increased acute care utilization by the IPC group may reflect persistent confounding by indication.

Completion of an Outpatient Visit After Skilled Nursing Facility Discharge and Readmission Risk.

OBJECTIVES: Examine the association between completion of an outpatient visit with a physician or advanced practice provider (PCP) within 7 days of discharge from a short skilled nursing facility (SNF) stay and 30-day readmission and determine if functional status at discharge moderates visit effectiveness. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Large integrated health care system. PARTICIPANTS: Adults 65 years and older, discharged home from a short SNF stay (n = 4073). INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS: Exposure is completion of an outpatient visit with a PCP within 7 days of discharge from an SNF. Primary outcome is readmission within 30 days of SNF discharge. Covariates included gender, risk score for readmission or early death, medical or surgical hospitalization, SNF facility, SNF length of stay, SNF stay in the previous 12 months, discharge to home or home health, and discharge functional independence measures (FIM). RESULTS: A total of 476 (11.6%) patients were readmitted within 30 days of SNF discharge. Patients who completed an outpatient visit with a PCP within 7 days of SNF discharge had a 23% higher risk of being readmitted compared to patients who did not complete any visit (hazard ratio [HR] 1.23, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.01-1.50). Patients who had FIM scores ≥80 and completed a visit had an increased readmission risk (HR 1.37, 95% CI 1.04-1.79); the increased risk was not seen for those with worse functional impairment, FIM <80 (HR 1.11, 95% CI 0.85-1.46). CONCLUSION: The finding of increased risk of readmission post SNF discharge with completion of an outpatient visit likely reflects inadequate adjustment for selection bias in this observational study, which strongly argues for the need to design prospective studies to test transitional care services post SNF discharge.

A cross-sectional study of provider and patient characteristics associated with outpatient disclosures of dietary supplement use.

OBJECTIVE: Explore patterns in patients' disclosures of supplement use and identify provider and patient characteristics associated with disclosures. METHODS: Cross-sectional study of 61 outpatient primary care, integrative medicine, and complementary medicine providers, and 603 of their patients. Primary outcomes were supplement disclosures (based on audio recorded office visits, post-visit patient surveys and medical record abstractions for the day of the visits). RESULTS: Seventy-nine percent of 603 patients reported on a post-visit survey that they took a total of 2107 dietary supplements. Of those taking supplements, 232 patients (48.6%) discussed at least one supplement with their provider on the day of their office visit. However, patients disclosed only 714 (33.9%) of the 2107 supplements they were taking. Patients more frequently disclosed supplement use when they saw providers who attributed greater importance to asking about supplements. Patient characteristics such as patient activation, number of medical conditions, and use of prescription medications were not associated with disclosure of supplement use. CONCLUSIONS: Provider rating of the importance of asking about supplements is a major factor prompting patients' disclosures of supplement use. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Provider-targeted interventions to encourage provider awareness about potential supplement-drug interactions are needed to increase disclosures about dietary supplement use.