IMPORTANT QUESTIONS FOR HOSPICE IN THE NEXT CENTURY APPENDICES APPENDIX A: Literature Review Methodology APPENDIX B: National Hospice Organization’s Sample Contract APPENDIX C: Medical Guidelines for Determining Prognosis in Selected Non-Cancer Diseases APPENDIX D: Wisconsin State Guidelines for Medicare Hospice Care Provision in the Nursing Home APPENDIX E: Acknowledgement List APPENDIX A. LITERATURE REVIEW METHODOLOGY OVERVIEW The purpose of the literature review was to update Mor and Allen's 1987 hospice review (Mor & Allen, 1987) by identifying subsequent completed and ongoing hospice research, and by documenting research findings relating to the utilization, cost and quality of hospice care. A focus of the review was the Medicare hospice benefit in the nursing facility. An extensive search was conducted utilizing online databases and Internet resources. Additionally, unpublished work was solicited from leading health services researchers. The complete methodology including search strategies and subsequent results are detailed below. SEARCHES CONDUCTED Initial online research databases searched for this review included Medline (medical research), Psychlit (psychological research), Sociofile (sociological research), Econlit (economic research) and ERIC (reports). First, a search using the key word "hospice" was employed yielding nearly 3,000 records. This search was refined using the following set of key words in addition to the key word hospice: Medicare, Medicaid, cost, utilization, expenditure, quality of care, quality of life, outcome, grief or bereavement, depression, pain or symptom control, patient or family satisfaction, and. All abstracts found with these key words were reviewed and articles were selected based on their relevance to the goals of the current project and the following criteria: (1) research published after Mor and Allen's 1987 review; (2) research conducted in the U.S.; (3) analytic methods were employed. The National Hospice Organization (NHO) also provided us with a 1994 bibliography of all identified literature from a variety of databases. Bibliographies from databases that were not initially searched were examined. These databases included Ageline, Cancerlit, Family Resources, CINAHL, Health Periodicals, Religion Index, Sociological Abstracts and Dissertation Abstracts. Finally, a HealthSTAR search (policy and administrative issues in health care) was conducted using hospice and economics cost savings, health expenditures, health care costs, reimbursement mechanisms and cost-benefit analysis. In addition to online database searches, Internet searches were performed. First, searches were conducted in government web sites for relevant reports, publications, research or demonstration projects. These sites included the Health Care Financing Administration and the Office of the Inspector General. Second, research funded from the following agencies were searched using "hospice" as a keyword: National Institute of Health (NIH), Agency for Health Care Policy and Research (AHCPR), The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Last Act Initiative, and the Open Society's Project on Death in America Campaign. When relevant research projects were found, the principal A-1 investigator was contacted and asked to describe the purpose, current status and findings of the project if available. Finally, after reviewing the current abstracts and also the previous references reported in Mor and Allen's review, a list of 20 leading health services researchers in hospice care were identified. These researchers were contacted by letter and asked to provide information about any current research (funded or not funded) that they were pursuing relating to hospice care. RESULTS OF SEARCHES The results of the online database search are shown below (Table A.1). Because no program was used to sort the abstracts and identify duplicates, the number of abstracts identified for each category may be an overestimate. The limited number of articles identified for inclusion in the literature review was not surprising given the criterion employed. Indeed, in their final bibliography, Mor and Allen reported only 13% of their total bibliography contained analytic papers and only 7% were based on outcomes of hospice care. Additional references (10) were found in the NHO bibliography and 3 were subsequently used in the review. Similarly, HealthSTAR search yielded an additional meeting abstract and one article. Key Word(s) Hospice and Cost Utilization Expenditures Outcome Quality of Care Medicare Medicaid TABLE A.1. Search Results Using On-line Databases Hits Articles Reviewed Met Criteria 2,915 N/A N/A 155 16 11 124 11 8 14 2 1 91 2 2 127 7 5 155 36 23 22 9 6 114 5 5 TOTAL 802 88 61 NOTE: Online databases included Medline, Psychlit, Sociofile, Econlit and ERIC. Some "hits" may be duplicated due to the use of multiple databases. Internet searches provided varied materials including reports, background information and funded grants. The numbers of identified grants are shown on Table A.2 below. Under the Department of Health and Human Services, the Office of the Inspector General search yielded information on three relevant audits that were conducted under Operation Restore Trust. These audits and their findings were included and discussed in the literature review. A-2 TABLE A.2. Results of Internet Searches for Grants Funding Agency Reviewed Met Criteria for Inclusion National Institute of Health 72 1 Agency for Health Care Policy & Research 10 3 The Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Last Act 27 3 Initiative Open Society's Project on Death in America 81 4 Campaign Finally, of the 20 health researchers that were contacted by letter, 10 return letters were received. Of these, 2 researchers gave us additional information to include in the review on recent research they were conducting. A-3 APPENDIX B. NATIONAL HOSPICE ORGANIZATION’S SAMPLE CONTRACT INTRODUCTION Attached you will find a sample nursing home contract. Please be aware that this document is meant to be utilized after your organization has made the decision to deliver hospice care in nursing homes. BACKGROUND INFORMATION There are currently more than 1.5 million persons living in nursing homes across the United States. One in four women age 85 or older lives in a nursing home, compared to one in seven men in the same age group. Of Americans age 65 and older, 43% will spend some time in a nursing home before death. In the past few years, increasing attention has been focused on establishing relationships between hospices and nursing facilities. The Omnibus Reconciliation Act (OBRA) of 1986 first established that hospice care could be provided in a nursing home under the routine home care level. With the passage of OBRA '89, the financial disincentives were removed. The regulatory environment improved with OBRA '90, known as the Nursing Home Reform Act, when nursing homes were required to meet standards similar in philosophy to hospice. As these changes have occurred, the National Hospice Organization has received an increased number of requests for a sample nursing home contract. Medicaid requires that a contract is in place before hospice services are provided. In response to the needs of its membership, NHO sought legal assistance in developing a generic contract. Providers are advised to utilize this tool as a guide and to make modifications in relation to state laws and their individualized needs under the direction of local legal counsel. FACILITATING WORKING TOGETHER Although the pieces have now fallen into place from a financial, regulatory, and legal standpoint, establishing a mutually beneficial relationship is still difficult. Procedures need to be agreed upon for the following areas: − − − − Obtaining and recording physician orders Maintenance of medical records Scheduling and coordinating hospice visits Defining role of each hospice team member A-4 − − − − Developing and updating a coordinated Plan of Care Referral of patients Provision of continuous care and general in-patient care Notifying hospice of changes in a patient's condition The above list of issues to be considered in negotiating relationships with nursing facilities is not all inclusive, but rather a sample of the types of issues to be examined. The intent of this guide to implementing a nursing facility contract was to focus the hospice provider on issues of primary concern. Additional important considerations are your state nursing home regulations and, where applicable, the hospice licensing law. There are many hospices throughout the United States that have successful programs in place and are willing to provide technical assistance. It is through the sharing of experiences that we will be able to refine the integration of hospice services within this health care setting. A-5 A-6 A-7 A-8 A-9 A-10 A-11 A-12 A-13 A-14 A-15 A-16 A-17 A-18 A-19 APPENDIX C. MEDICAL GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING PROGNOSIS IN SELECTED NONCANCER DISEASES MEDICAL GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING PROGNOSIS IN SELECTED NON-CANCER DISEASES Second Edition Published by The National Hospice Organization Copyright 1996, by the National Hospice Organization. All rights reserved. The National Hospice Organization 1901 North Moore Street, Suite 901 Arlington, VA 22209 Written by Standards and Accreditation Committee Medical Guidelines Task Force Brad Stuart, MD Carla Alexander, MD Cheryl Arenella, MD Stephen Connor, PhD, Medical Guidelines Task Force Chair Laurel Herbst, MD, American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine Diane Jones, MSW, Hospice Association of America Barry Kinzbrunner, MD Paul Rousseau, MD True Ryndes, ANP, MPH, Standards and Accreditation Committee Chairperson Michael Wohlfeiler, MD, JD Chris Cody, RNC, MSN, Staff Liaison Susan Buckley, CRNH, MS, Staff Liaison ©Copyright 1996, by the National Hospice Organization. All rights reserved. No portion of this publication may be duplicated without the written permission of the National Hospice Organization. Printed in the United States of America. These documents also are available at http://www.guideline.gov. Item Number 713008 ISBN 0-931207-50-9 A-20 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction and Overview............................................................................................. 22 General Guidelines for Determining Prognosis ............................................................. 26 Heart Disease ............................................................................................................... 28 Pulmonary Disease ....................................................................................................... 30 Dementia....................................................................................................................... 32 HIV Disease .................................................................................................................. 34 Liver Disease ................................................................................................................ 37 Renal Disease............................................................................................................... 40 Stroke and Coma .......................................................................................................... 43 Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis ....................................................................................... 45 References.................................................................................................................... 49 Appendices: I. Type, Strength and Consistency of Evidence ..................................................... 63 II. Karnofsky Performance Status Scale ................................................................. 64 III. New York Heart Association Functional Classification ....................................... 65 IV. Functional Assessment Staging (FAST) Scale: Dementia.................................. 66 V. Typical Time Course of Alzheimer’s Disease ........................................................* VI. Diagnostic Imaging Factors Indicating Poor Prognosis After Stroke................... 68 Worksheets ......................................................................................................................* * These sections were not included as part of Appendix C. A-21 INTRODUCTION AND OVERVIEW This document is written to help identify which patients with non-oncologic terminal illness are likely to have a significantly decreased prognosis if the disease runs its normal course. These Guidelines may also be helpful in determining patient eligibility under the Medicare/Medicaid Hospice Benefit by defining a population that may have a life expectancy of approximately six months. Increased access to hospice services for patients with diagnoses across the medical spectrum is also a goal of this effort. Until recently, hospice in the US has been identified with care of the end-stage cancer patient.1 Dissemination of these Guidelines to hospice programs and the medical community should facilitate hospice referrals for patients with heart, lung, liver, Alzheimer's dementia, HIV and other non-cancer diseases. Recent studies support this effort as timely and relevant. Earlier this year, Christakis and Escarce2 reported that in 1990, less than twenty percent of hospice referrals in five major states carried a non-cancer diagnosis. Since that time, the proportion of hospice admissions for diseases other than cancer has risen steadily. However, because of inherent challenges in predicting prognosis in non-cancer disease, a large proportion of patients surviving longer than six months are in this category. In the Christakis and Escarce cohort, for example, hospice patients with dementia had a median survival of 74 days, and 34.7 percent of these patients survived for longer than six months. These findings suggest that physicians and hospice programs might benefit from help in determining which non-cancer patients are likely to have a prognosis of approximately six months. These Guidelines are a starting point, both for hospice programs evaluating patients for admission and recertification, and for critically-needed research on prognosis in end-stage disease. Pending confirmation and refinement through ongoing research with hospice patients, they provide a set of working criteria to use in determining prognosis. The Guidelines do not pretend to predict prognosis exactly in each case. In fact, even if based directly on clinical research, any set of criteria defines a range of probabilities for mortality in a specific population. Prediction of prognosis in individual cases cannot be expected; clinical judgment is always required on the original assessment and throughout the admission. As of this writing, research is underway to assess the accuracy of existing Guidelines, and to amend them based on new findings. For example, one group has already documented that the previously-published NHO Guidelines3 for Alzheimer's disease do indeed predict six-month mortality in about 85% of patients who fit previous Guideline criteria.4 This is an improvement over Christakis and Escarce's findings from 1990 data, where only about 65% of hospice patients with dementia died within six months. Recent findings also have allowed us to refine the criteria for severity of A-22 dementia past Stage 7 of the FAST criteria.5 These changes have been included in this edition. The Medical Nature of the Guidelines These Guidelines are based on medical findings. However, decisions to admit patients to hospice are often not based on medical factors alone. They are routinely influenced by nonmedical factors which would generally be reflected in the treatment plan, e.g. patient decisions to receive strict symptom control rather than life-prolonging care, or selection of "optimal" rather than "maximal" treatment regimens tempered by intolerance or refusal of medication due to side-effects. In addition, it is important to make a distinction between admitting a patient to the hospice program and certifying a patient for the Medicare Hospice Benefit. Individual hospice programs may establish admission criteria that reflect the unique characteristics and values of their communities. This may mean that some patients could be admitted to hospice care prior to an estimated six months before death. However, care must be taken to certify patients for the Benefit only when it is reasonable to conclude that their prognosis is six months or less. In other cases alternative modes of reimbursement, often provided through community support, can be sought outside the Medicare Hospice Benefit. Emphasis should be placed on evaluating the whole person and the entirety of the illness. It is important to note, for example, that a patient may have multiple medical problems, none of which individually amount to a terminal diagnosis, but when taken together indicate a terminal condition. In short, clinical judgment that takes both medical and nonmedical factors into account is necessary for accurate estimation of prognosis. Potential Limitations Several caveats are in order when using these Guidelines for prognostic purposes. They are a first attempt at extrapolating a large amount of heterogeneous evidence from many studies to predict survival in non-cancer diseases (see Appendix I). Their accuracy will need to be validated by further research. These Guidelines should be applied to individual cases very cautiously, for at least the following reasons: 1. Many of the studies referenced here indicate an increased likelihood of death, sometimes within an uncertain time frame. The six month definition of terminal illness adopted for the Medicare Hospice Benefit has rarely been used as a specific outcome measure in most of this research. Further studies with larger populations of hospice patients are needed to determine median survival accurately with reference to the six month standard. 2. Clinical judgment must always be applied in each individual case to supplement these Guidelines. All studies are performed on large enough populations to attain A-23 statistical significance, so that individual differences in disease progression are averaged and lost to view. An individual patient who may meet Guideline criteria that were significant in a study of a large cohort might respond in unpredictable ways and have unexpected outcomes as his or her disease runs its own unique course. Therefore the Guidelines must be applied to patients not only on admission, but at intervals throughout the patient's course in hospice. 3. Many of the studies referenced here were done in institutionalized populations. They may or may not be generalizable to patients living at home with family caregivers. 4. Many studies pool patients at all stages of disease. Studies done with selected cohorts of end-stage patients might yield different conclusions. For instance, for a large population of patients with dementia at all stages of severity, antibiotics may be shown to postpone mortality. However, the same drugs have not been shown to lengthen survival in the subpopulation with very end-stage dementia.6 Again, further research is needed in the terminal population. 5. Almost all studies have been done with patients who received standard medical therapy when they became acutely ill, thus prolonging the course of the illness. Little recent research has been done to study the natural course of untreated end-stage disease. Thus, much of the literature may be defining length of life as inappropriately long for patients who choose a non-curative approach. 6. The course of most non-cancer disease is inherently difficult to predict. The natural history of most non-cancer diseases is characterized by periods of relative stability punctuated by acute downturns, as opposed to the comparatively relentless, and thus more predictable, downhill course in cancer. This natural tendency toward stabilization in non-cancer disease may be augmented by hospice intervention, which may bring about a prolongation of the terminal phase due to improved patient compliance, symptom control and prevention of complications. 7. This difficulty in predicting mortality in non-cancer disease is compounded by the fact that palliation of non-cancer disease is frequently similar, and sometimes identical, to standard medical treatment. Therefore hospice can and frequently does coincidentally extend the life of the non-cancer patient in the act of palliating symptoms. This situation is new to many hospices, who have been trained to treat cancer pain but to leave treatment of cancer itself to the oncologist. To palliate cancer symptoms, hospice employs medications and other interventions which in most cases do not prolong life. Chemotherapy or radiation for palliation are generally used by hospices only when pain and symptoms can not be managed by other interventions. On the other hand, hospice frequently uses the same medications and interventions to palliate non-cancer symptoms that the primary physician or medical specialist uses for active treatment. For instance, skillful palliation of end-stage congestive heart failure requires not only morphine A-24 for dyspnea, but also judicious use of diuretics and vasodilators. But these drugs do more than make the patient comfortable -- it is well established that they also prolong life significantly.7 Thus good hospice care can stabilize patients with non-cancer disease, creating a dilemma for the program if the patient survives for longer than six months without evidence of serious clinical decline. Fiscal intermediaries and hospice programs alike would benefit from a thorough awareness of these factors. These Guidelines are just a starting point in decision making in non-cancer disease. It is clear that they must be supplemented by clinical judgment at the time of admission. But frequent clinical reassessment, decisions concerning recertification versus possible discharge from the Medicare/Medicaid Hospice Benefit, thorough documentation of medical evidence of continued disease progression and cooperative review of appropriateness of care with intermediaries are all important ongoing considerations. Acknowledgment Recognition should be given to other systems of prognostication already devised for use in advanced medical illness.8 However, these Guidelines were developed de novo for several reasons. First, previous systems were developed for predicting prognosis in seriously ill hospitalized patients who were all receiving aggressive medical therapy. This is a different population than those who are generally considered hospice candidates, although this situation could change. Also, prior prognostic systems require large amounts of detailed clinical and laboratory data. This quantity and quality of information is primarily utilized in research studies, and generally unavailable to providers in the field. Additionally, unlike other systems, these Guidelines were designed for ease of application by the average hospice program, whose staff may not have access to the computer hardware, software and programming expertise needed to use more sophisticated prognostic systems. The medical knowledge and clinical experience needed to understand and apply these Guidelines should be well within the existing capabilities of the hospice staff, ideally under the active leadership of a qualified and enthusiastic Medical Director. A-25 GENERAL GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING PROGNOSIS The following parameters may be used to help determine whether a patient is appropriate for hospice care and/or eligible for the Medicare/Medicaid Hospice Benefit. These General Guidelines apply to all patients referred to hospice. However, they may be specifically applied to patients who do not fall under any of the specific diagnostic categories for which disease-specific Guidelines have been written. An example might be the elderly debilitated patient whose intake of food and fluid has declined to the point where weight loss has become significant, although no specific disease predominates in the clinical picture. The patient should meet all of the following criteria: I. The patient's condition is life limiting, and the patient and/or family have been informed of this determination. A. A "life limiting condition" may be due to a specific diagnosis, a combination of diseases, or there may be no specific diagnosis defined.9 II. The patient and/or family have elected treatment goals directed toward relief of symptoms, rather than cure of the underlying disease. III. The patient has either of the following: A. Documented clinical progression of disease, which may include: 1. Progression of the primary disease process as listed in disease-specific criteria, as documented by serial physician assessment, laboratory, radiologic or other studies. 2. Multiple Emergency Department visits or inpatient hospitalizations over the prior six months.10 3. For homebound patients receiving home health services, nursing assessment may be documented. 4. For patients who do not qualify under 1, 2 or 3, a recent decline in functional status may be documented. a. Functional decline should be recent, to distinguish patients who are terminal from those with reduced baseline functional status due to chronic illness. Clinical judgment is required for patients with a terminal condition and impaired status due to a different non-terminal disease, e.g., a patient chronically paraplegic from spinal cord injury who is recently diagnosed with cancer. A-26 b. Diminished functional status may be documented by either: 1. Karnofsky Performance Status of less than or equal to 50%,11,12,13 (see Appendix II) or 2. Dependence in at least three of six Activities of Daily Living (ADL's).14,15,16,17,18,19,20,21,22 "Activities of Daily Living" are: i. Bathing ii. Dressing iii. Feeding23 iv. Transfers v. Continence of urine and stool vi. Ability to ambulate independently to bathroom. B. Documented recent impaired nutritional status related to the terminal process. 1. Unintentional, progressive weight loss of greater than 10% over the prior six months.24,25,26,27 2. Serum albumin less than 2.5 gm/dl28,29,30 may be a helpful prognostic indicator, but should not be used in isolation from other factors in I-III above. A-27 MEDICAL GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING PROGNOSIS: HEART DISEASE This section is meant to assist in the determination of prognosis for patients with end-stage heart disease. It is important to remember that with skillful palliation including judicious use of diuretics and vasodilators, particularly angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors, some patients may survive for long periods with extremely severe symptoms. These drugs definitely promote patient comfort, but they also prolong life.31 On the other hand, some patients with advanced coronary disease may die suddenly and unexpectedly from acute ventricular arrhythmias. The likelihood of early mortality is increased in patients who show all of the following characteristics: I. Symptoms of recurrent congestive heart failure (CHF) at rest. A. These patients are classified as New York Heart Association (NYHA) Class IV32 (see Appendix III). B. Ejection fraction of 20% or less is helpful supplemental objective evidence, but should not be required if not already available.33 II. Patients should already be optimally treated with diuretics and vasodilators, preferably angiotensin-converting enzyme (ACE) inhibitors. A. The patient experiences persistent symptoms of congestive heart failure despite attempts at maximal medical management with diuretics and vasodilators. B. "Optimally treated" means that patients who are not on vasodilators have a medical reason for refusing these drugs, e.g. hypotension or renal disease. C. Although newer beta blockers with vasodilator activity, e.g. carvedilol, have recently been shown to decrease morbidity and mortality in chronic CHF,34 they are not included in the definition of "optimal treatment" at this time. III. In patients with refractory, optimally treated CHF as defined above, each of the following factors have been shown to decrease survival further, and thus may help in educating medical personnel as to the appropriateness of hospice for cardiac patients. A. Symptomatic supraventricular or ventricular arrhythmias that are resistant to antiarrhythmic therapy. B. History of cardiac arrest and resuscitation in any setting.35 A-28 C. History of unexplained syncope.36,37,38 D. Cardiogenic brain embolism, i.e., embolic CVA of cardiac origin.39 E. Concomitant HIV disease.40 A-29 MEDICAL GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING PROGNOSIS: PULMONARY DISEASE Determining prognosis in end-stage lung disease is extremely difficult. There is marked variability in survival.41 Physician estimates of prognosis vary in accuracy, even in patients who appear end-stage.42 Even at the time of intubation and mechanical ventilation for respiratory failure from acute exacerbation of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), six-month survival cannot be predicted with certainty from simple data easily available to the clinician.43 Far less information than this is available to most hospice programs at the time of referral. Patients who fit the following parameters can be expected to have the lowest survival rates. Although the end stages of various forms of lung disease differ in some respects, most follow a final common pathway leading to progressive hypoxemia, cor pulmonale and recurrent infections. Thus, these Guidelines refer to patients with many forms of advanced pulmonary disease. At the present time, it is uncertain what number or combination of these factors might predict six-month mortality; clinical judgment is required. I. Severity of chronic lung disease documented by: A. Disabling dyspnea at rest, poorly or unresponsive to bronchodilators, resulting in decreased functional activity, e.g., bed-to-chair existence, often exacerbated by other debilitating symptoms such as fatigue and cough. B. Forced Expiratory Volume in One Second (FEV1), after bronchodilator, less than 30% of predicted,44,45,46 is helpful supplemental objective evidence, but should not be required if not already available. C. Progressive pulmonary disease. 1. Increasing visits to Emergency Department or hospitalizations for pulmonary infections and/or respiratory failure. 2. Decrease in FEV1 on serial testing of greater than 40 ml per year47,48,49 is helpful supplemental objective evidence, but should not be required if not already available. II. Presence of cor pulmonale or right heart failure (RHF).50,51,52 A. These should be due to advanced pulmonary disease, not primary or secondary to left heart disease or valvulopathy. B. Cor pulmonale may be documented by: A-30 1. Echocardiography. 2. Electrocardiogram. 3. Chest x-ray. 4. Physical signs of RHF. III. Hypoxemia at rest on supplemental oxygen. A. pO2 less than or equal to 55 mm Hg on supplemental oxygen. B. Oxygen saturation less than or equal to 88% on supplemental oxygen. IV. Hypercapnia. A. pCO2 equal to or greater than 50 mm Hg. V. Unintentional progressive weight loss of greater than 10% of body weight over the preceding six months.53,54 VI. Resting tachycardia greater than 100/minute in a patient with known severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.55,56,57,58 A-31 MEDICAL GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING PROGNOSIS: DEMENTIA This section is meant to assist in determining whether a patient with end-stage dementia is appropriate for hospice care and/or eligible for the Medicare/Medicaid Hospice Benefit. Although dementia shortens life independent of culture or ethnicity,59 prediction of six-month mortality is challenging. Severity of dementia alone correlates with poor survival in studies of institutionalized60 and outpatients,61 but patients with very advanced dementia can survive for long periods with meticulous care as long as they do not develop lethal complications. Death usually occurs, in fact, as a result of comorbid conditions.62 The term "dementia" refers here to chronic, primary and progressive cognitive impairment of either the Alzheimer or multi-infarct type. Although most research on prognosis in dementia is done with Alzheimer's patients, the vascular (multi-infarct) dementias appear to progress to death more quickly.63,64,65 These guidelines do not refer to acute, potentially reversible or secondary dementias, i.e., those due to drug intoxication, cancer, AIDS, major stroke, or heart, renal or liver failure. I. Functional Assessment Staging A. Even severely demented patients may have a prognosis of up to two years. Survival time depends on variables such as the incidence of comorbidities and the comprehensiveness of care. B. The patient should be at or beyond Stage Seven of the Functional Assessment Staging66 Scale (see Appendix IV). The factors listed below should be understood explicitly, since many patients do not progress in an orderly fashion through the substages of Stage 7. Also see Appendix V, "Typical Time Course of Alzheimer's Disease," for a pictorial representation of the continuum of dementia.67 C. The patient should show all of the following characteristics: 1. Unable to ambulate without assistance. This is a critical factor. Recent data indicate that patients who retain the ability to ambulate independently do not tend to die within six months, even if all other criteria for advance dementia are present.68 2. Unable to dress without assistance. 3. Unable to bathe properly. 4. Urinary and fecal incontinence. A-32 a. Occasionally or more frequently, over the past weeks. b. Reported by knowledgeable informant or caregiver. 5. Unable to speak or communicate meaningfully. a. Ability to speak is limited to approximately a half dozen or fewer intelligible and different words, in the course of an average day or in the course of an intensive interview. II. Presence of Medical Complications. A. The presence of medical comorbid conditions of sufficient severity to warrant medical treatment, documented within the past year, whether or not the decision was made to treat the condition, decrease survival in advanced dementia.69,70 B. Comorbid Conditions associated with dementia: 1. Aspiration pneumonia. 2. Pyelonephritis or other upper urinary tract infection. 3. Septicemia. 4. Decubitus ulcers, multiple, stage 3-4. 5. Fever recurrent after antibiotics C. Difficulty swallowing food or refusal to eat, sufficiently severe that patient cannot maintain sufficient fluid and calorie intake to sustain life, with patient or surrogate refusing tube feedings or parenteral nutrition. 1. Patients who are receiving tube feedings must have documented impaired nutritional status as indicated by: a. Unintentional, progressive weight loss of greater than 10% over the prior six months.71,72,73,74 b. Serum albumin less than 2.5 gm/dl may be a helpful prognostic indicator, but should not be used by itself.75,76,77 A-33 MEDICAL GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING PROGNOSIS: HIV DISEASE With the introduction of new classes of anti-retroviral therapy such as protease inhibitors (PI's), and better control of opportunistic infections, the perception of HIV may be changing from that of inexorably fatal disease to that of chronic illness.78 The ability to measure the amount of circulating virus (viral load, HIV RNA)79,80 has dramatically changed both the management of disease81 and the ability to predict survival. Previously published data using the CD4+ cell count82 alone as a prognostic marker will not be as helpful in determining appropriateness for hospice care. With the announcement that viral load could be suppressed to undetectable levels for at least a year in 90% of treated patients by a combination of AZT, 3TC and indinavir, a PI,83 a new air of hopefulness exists in AIDS treatment. Although authorities now discuss the possibility of eradicating HIV from patients, it is far from certain that new drugs will result in complete reconstitution of the immune system,84 or in recovery of other organ systems already seriously damaged by HIV. Therefore, at this time these Guidelines must reflect past literature until newer studies are available. HIV mortality is influenced by new and changing therapies, practitioners' skill and experience in management, and individual patient tolerance for treatment. Other factors contribute to the difficulty of prognosis in this disease. It occurs predominately in the young, who are both constitutionally better able to withstand a heavy burden of disease, and less likely to forego intensive therapies, than the more elderly populations typical of other end-stage illnesses. Because of improved prophylactic regimens, most deaths from AIDS are now caused by opportunistic infections, persistent wasting, or neoplasm. It is important to discuss a patient's clinical course with a physician who is experienced in caring for persons with HIV disease85,86 or with one who is experienced in Palliative Medicine. As in any end-stage disease, optimum therapy should have been exhausted or refused by the patient. The course over the previous month may reflect the patient's prognosis. Concerning protease inhibitors, unless patients taking these medications fit the CD4+ and viral load criteria listed below, they may have a prognosis considerably longer than six months. Thus these drugs may be considered life-prolonging, not palliative, in the hospice setting. Additionally, patients already enrolled in hospice who decide to start these medications may lengthen their prognosis considerably. Programs will have to take these issues into account when deciding whether to cover PI's under the Medicare/Medicaid Hospice Benefit. The following factors are correlated with early mortality and therefore may be helpful when evaluating a patient for terminal care or for coverage by the Medicare/Medicaid Hospice Benefit: A-34 I. CD4+ Count A. Patients whose CD4+ count is below 25 cells/mcL, measured during a period when patient is relatively free of acute illness, may have a prognosis less than six months, but should be followed clinically and observed for disease progression and decline in recent functional status. B. Patients with CD4+ count above 50 cells/mcL who are followed by an experienced AIDS practitioner probably have a prognosis longer than six months unless there is a non-HIV-related co-existing life-threatening disease. In one study of CD4+ counts and mortality, median survival of the entire population of patients with CD4+ <50 was 11.9 months.87 II. Viral Load A. Patients with a persistent HIV RNA (viral load) of >100,000 copies/ml may have a prognosis less than six months. B. Patients with lower viral loads may have a prognosis of less than six months if.88 1. They have elected to forego antiretroviral and prophylactic medication. 2. Their functional status is declining. 3. They are experiencing complications listed in IV below. III. Life-threatening complications with median survival: The following HIV-related opportunistic diseases all are associated with prognosis less than six months. Note that prognosis may be longer for certain conditions if patient elects treatment: A. CNS lymphoma89 2.5 months B. Progressive multifocal leukoencephalopathy90 4 months C. Cryptosporidiosis91 5 months D. Wasting (loss of 33% lean body mass)92 <6 months E. MAC bacteremia, untreated93 <6 months A-35 IV. F. Visceral Kaposi's sarcoma unresponsive to therapy94 6 month mortality 50%. G. Renal failure, refuses or fails dialysis95,96 <6 months H. Advanced AIDS dementia complex97 6 months I. Toxoplasmosis98 6 months The following factors have been shown to decrease survival significantly and should be documented if present: A. Chronic persistent diarrhea for one year, regardless of etiology.99 B. Persistent serum albumin < 2.5 gm/dl.100,101,102 C. Concomitant substance abuse.103 D. Age greater than 50.104,105,106,107 E. Decisions to forego antiretroviral, chemotherapeutic and prophylactic drug therapy related specifically to HIV disease. F. Congestive heart failure, symptomatic at rest.108 A-36 MEDICAL GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING PROGNOSIS: LIVER DISEASE Prognosis in advanced liver disease has been widely studied to assess readiness for liver transplantation.109,110 Clinical symptoms and signs and laboratory values contained within the Child-Turcotte classification111 as modified by Pugh,112 not included here, have been shown to correlate significantly with early mortality.113,114 Some of these variables, with the addition of other clinical syndromes associated with mortality, are shown below. Although accurate, albeit complex, prognostic indices based on multivariate analyses have been developed,115 they are still controversial. They are not recommended here since: 1. All the required elements may not be available to hospice programs at the time of referral. 2. The computing power needed to calculate these scores may not be available to many hospice admissions staff. 3. Nearly every study on prognosis in advanced liver disease has been done outside the US, and World Health Organization data reveals that patterns of death from liver disease, as well as risk factors such as alcoholism and hepatitis B, can differ widely among countries.116 The following factors have been shown to correlate with poor short-term survival in advanced cirrhosis of the liver due to alcoholism, hepatitis, or uncertain causes (cryptogenic). Their effects are additive; i.e. prognosis worsens with the addition of each one. Clinical judgment is vital. The following factors should be followed and reviewed over time. Patients should have end-stage cirrhosis; those who are newly decompensated, i.e. in their first hospitalization, may improve dramatically with treatment compared to those who are in the terminal phase of a chronic process.117 The patient should not be a candidate for liver transplantation. I. Laboratory indicators of severely impaired liver function: Patients with this degree of impairment have a poor prognosis. The patient should show both of the following: A. Prothrombin time prolonged more than 5 sec. over control. B. Serum albumin < 2.5 gm/dl. A-37 II. Clinical indicators of end-stage liver disease: The patient should show at least one of the following: A. Ascites, refractory to sodium restriction and diuretics, or patient noncompliant. 1. Maximal diuretics generally used: Spironolactone 75-150 mg/day plus furosemide >40 mg/day.118 a. Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis.119 2. Median survival 30% at one year;120 high mortality even when infection cured initially if liver disease is severe or accompanied by renal disease.121 a. Hepatorenal syndrome.122 3. In patient with cirrhosis and ascites, elevated creatinine and BUN with oliguria (400 ml/da) and urine sodium concentration <10 mEq/l. 4. Usually occurs during hospitalization; survival generally days to weeks. B. Hepatic encephalopathy, refractory to protein restriction and lactulose or neomycin,123 or patient non-compliant. 1. Manifested by: decreased awareness of environment, sleep disturbance, depression, emotional lability, somnolence, slurred speech, obtundation.124 2. Physical exam may show flapping tremor of asterixis, although this finding may be absent in later stages.125 3. Stupor and coma are extremely late-stage findings. a. Recurrent variceal bleeding.126 4. Following initial variceal hemorrhage, one third died in hospital, one third rebled within six weeks; two thirds survived less than 12 months.127 5. Patient should have rebled despite therapy, or refused further therapy, which currently includes:128,129 a. Injection sclerotherapy130 or band ligation, if available.131 b. Oral beta blockers.132 A-38 c. Transjugular intrahepatic portosystemic shunt (TIPS).133 III. The following factors have been shown to worsen prognosis and should be documented if present: A. Progressive malnutrition134 B. Muscle wasting with reduced strength and endurance. C. Continued active alcoholism, i.e. > 80 g ethanol per day135,136,137 D. Hepatocellular carcinoma138 E. HBsAg positivity139 A-39 MEDICAL GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING PROGNOSIS: RENAL DISEASE This section is meant to assist in determining whether a patient with end-stage renal disease is appropriate for hospice care and/or eligible for the Medicare/Medicaid Hospice Benefit. Absent other comorbid conditions, the patient should not be seeking dialysis or renal transplant. Patients who do refuse dialysis or transplant are generally appropriate for hospice services if they fit dialysis criteria.140,141 When evaluating patients with end-stage renal disease (ESRD),142 a nephrology consultation may be helpful since individual patient variables can influence longevity.143 Hospitalized patients may develop acute renal failure (ARF) following trauma or major surgery. Short-term survival may be difficult to predict during initial evaluation and treatment. However, factors listed in III. below may be helpful in evaluating these acutely-ill patients for hospice admission.144 Chronic renal failure (CRF) can be treated with either hemo- or chronic ambulatory peritoneal dialysis (CAPD), which prolongs survival indefinitely. If dialysis is discontinued, the chance of early death is greatly increased. An occasional patient with residual renal function after dialysis is discontinued may remain alive for a period of time, but survival beyond six months is highly unlikely. Care should be taken in assessing patients with nephrotic syndrome. This illness often follows a protracted course; nephrology consultation can assist with prognosis. I. Laboratory criteria for renal failure. These values may be used to assess patients with renal failure who are not dialyzed, as well as those who survive more than a week or two after dialysis is discontinued. Patients with this degree of renal failure can be expected to die shortly without dialysis. Bearing in mind individual differences in tolerance for very elevated creatinine levels, critical renal failure is defined (HCFA form #2728) as: A. Creatinine clearance of less than 10cc/min (less than 15 cc/min for diabetics) AND B. Serum creatinine greater than 8.0 mg/dl (greater than 6.0 mg/dl for diabetics). Notes: 1. Creatinine clearance may be estimated by using the following formula, thus avoiding a 24-hour urine collection: Ccreat = (140 - age in yrs.) (body wt. in kg); (72) (serum creat in mg/dl) A-40 multiply by 0.85 for women. 2. Blood urea nitrogen (BUN) values are not used in the determination of critical renal failure, since they can be extremely elevated from prerenal azotemia due to dehydration, hypovolemia or other causes. II. Clinical signs and syndromes associated with renal failure. The following clinical signs are used as criteria for beginning dialysis. For patients with end-stage renal disease who are not to be dialyzed, the following may help define hospice appropriateness: A. Uremia: clinical manifestations of renal failure. 1. Confusion, obtundation 2. Intractable nausea and vomiting 3. Generalized pruritis 4. Restlessness, "restless legs" B. Oliguria: Urine output less than 400cc/24 hrs. C. Intractable hyperkalemia: persistent serum potassium >7.0 not responsive to medical management. D. Uremic pericarditis. E. Hepatorenal syndrome. F. Intractable fluid overload. III. In hospitalized patients with ARF, these comorbid conditions predict early mortality: A. Mechanical ventilation.145 B. Malignancy--other organ systems.146,147,148 C. Chronic lung disease.149 D. Advanced cardiac disease.150,151,152,153 E. Advanced liver disease.154 F. Sepsis.155,156,157,158 A-41 G. Immunosupression/AIDS. H. Albumin < 3.5 gm/dl.159 I. Cachexia.160 J. Platelet count < 25,000.161 K. Age > 75.162,163,164,165,166 L. Disseminated intravascular coagulation.167 M. Gastrointestinal bleeding.168 A-42 MEDICAL GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING PROGNOSIS: STROKE AND COMA After stroke, patients who do not die during the acute hospitalization tend to stabilize with supportive care only. Continuous decline in clinical or functional status over time means that the patient's prognosis is poor. Conversely, steady improvement in the patient's functional or physiologic status may indicate that the patient is not terminally ill. Care should be taken to distinguish true recovery of performance and physiologic function from the improvement in symptoms and subjective well-being that can accompany hospice intervention. I. During the acute phase immediately following a hemorrhagic or ischemic stroke, any of the following are strong predictors of early mortality: A. Coma or persistent vegetative state secondary to stroke, beyond three days' duration.169,170,171,172,173,174,175 B. In post-anoxic stroke, coma or severe obtundation, accompanied by severe myoclonus, persisting beyond three days past the anoxic event.176,177,178 C. Comatose patients with any 4 of the following on day 3 of coma had 97% mortality by two months:179 1. Abnormal brain stem response 2. Absent verbal response 3. Absent withdrawal response to pain 4. Serum creatinine >1.5 mg/dl 5. Age >70 D. Dysphagia severe enough to prevent the patient from receiving food and fluids necessary to sustain life, in a patient who declines, or is not a candidate for, artificial nutrition and hydration. E. If computed tomographic (CT) or magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) scans are available, certain specific findings may indicate decreased likelihood of survival, or at least poor prognosis for recovery of function even with vigorous rehabilitation efforts, which may influence decisions concerning life support or hospice. Please see Appendix VI for a list of these diagnostic imaging factors. It should be borne in mind that clinical variables, not imaging studies, are the primary criteria for hospice referral. A-43 II. Once the patient has entered the chronic phase, the following clinical factors may correlate with poor survival in the setting of severe stroke, and should be documented. The referenced factors have been studied in relation to prognosis in stroke, whereas others may be found elsewhere in these Guidelines where they relate to declining patients in general, or to comparable conditions such as dementia. A. Age greater than 70.180,181,182,183 B. Poor functional status, as evidenced by Karnofsky score of <50%. See Appendix II. C. Post-stroke dementia, as evidenced by a FAST score of greater than 7. See Appendix IV. D. Poor nutritional status, whether on artificial nutrition or not: 1. Unintentional progressive weight loss of greater than 10% over past six months.184,185,186,187 2. Serum albumin less than 2.5 gm/dl, may be a helpful prognostic indicator, but should not be used by itself.188,189,190 E. Medical complications related to debility and progressive clinical decline. It is assumed that these patients are in chronic care situations similar to those with end-stage dementia.191 Although studies are not available to relate these directly to six-month prognosis in stroke, their presence should be documented. 1. Aspiration pneumonia. 2. Upper urinary tract infection (pyelonephritis). 3. Sepsis. 4. Refractory stage 3-4 decubitus ulcers. 5. Fever recurrent after antibiotics. A-44 MEDICAL GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINING PROGNOSIS: AMYOTROPHIC LATERAL SCLEROSIS (ALS) Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) is a progressive neurologic disease that is fatal in about three fourths of patients within one to five years after symptom onset,192 with median survival of 4 years or less,193 although some studies indicate longer survival in some patients with symptom onset before age 45.194 The cause is unknown in 90% of cases, and at present there is no effective treatment.195,196 Crude mortality rates from ALS have risen about 50% in the last fifteen years,197,198 but this appears due to declining competitive mortality from ischemic heart disease and stroke rather than rising incidence of ALS.199 Although the disease usually starts with focal involvement, patients become quadriplegic and unable to speak, swallow and ultimately to breathe.200,201 A small percentage of patients may survive beyond five years,202 particularly with ventilators and feeding tubes, although centers specializing in the care of patients with advanced ALS report that with counseling, very few of them choose assisted ventilation.203 For predicting prognosis in ALS, several characteristics of the disease are important to remember: • ALS tends to progress in a linear fashion over time. Thus the overall rate of decline in each patient is fairly constant and predictable, unlike many other noncancer diseases. • However, no single variable deteriorates at a uniform rate in all patients.204 Therefore, multiple clinical parameters are required to judge the progression of ALS. • Although ALS usually presents in a localized anatomical area, the location of initial presentation does not correlate with survival time.205 By the time patients become end-stage, muscle denervation has become widespread, affecting all areas of the body, and initial predominance patterns do not persist. Bulbar presentation, for example, was thought to correlate with relatively poor prognosis, but more recent studies have shown that bulbar cases present with later age of onset, which does correlate with more rapid progression. • Progression of disease differs markedly from patient to patient, as much as 60fold in one series.206 Some patients decline rapidly and die quickly; others progress more slowly. For this reason, the history of the rate of progression in individual patients is important to obtain to predict prognosis. • In end-stage ALS, two factors are critical in determining prognosis: ability to breathe, and to a lesser extent ability to swallow. The former can be managed by A-45 artificial ventilation, and the latter by gastrostomy or other artificial feeding, unless the patient has recurrent aspiration pneumonia. Numerous ALS rating scales have been developed to help predict ALS prognosis for use in drug intervention trials.207,208,209,210,211,212 Although the predictive value of some are excellent, they are meant to grade patients in all stages of the disease. Their clinical complexity precludes their use by most hospice staffs, and many medical directors, without special training.213 More importantly, the only factor that is critical in end-stage ALS is respiratory function. The other variables considered in these rating systems, e.g. muscle strength, bulbar function other than swallowing, and upper and lower extremity function, are irrelevant in predicting six-month prognosis. Examination by a neurologist within three months of assessment for hospice is advised, both to confirm the diagnosis and to assist with prognosis. The following factors may define those ALS patients with expected survival of approximately six months. These patients generally fit one of the following categories 1. Both rapid progression of ALS and critically impaired ventilatory capacity. 2. Both rapid progression of ALS and critical nutritional impairment, with a decision not to receive artificial feeding. 3. Both rapid progression of ALS and life-threatening complications. I. Rapid progression of disease and critically impaired ventilatory capacity. A. Rapid progression of ALS. The patient should have developed most of their disability within the past 12 months. Patients with slow progression may survive for longer periods, although clinical judgment may still indicate they may be within six months of death. Examples would include, within the past year: 1. Progressing from independent ambulation to wheelchair- or bed-bound. 2. Progressing from normal to barely intelligible or unintelligible speech. 3. Progressing from normal to blenderized diet. 4. Progressing from independence in most or all Activities of Daily Living (ADL's) to needing major assist by caretaker in all ADL's. A-46 B. Critically impaired ventilatory capacity. The patient should have, within the past 12 months, developed extremely severe breathing disability. Examples include: 1. Vital Capacity (VC) less than 30% of predicted. 2. Significant dyspnea at rest. 3. Requiring supplemental oxygen at rest. 4. Patient declines intubation or tracheostomy and mechanical ventilation. Note: Patients who are already on assisted ventilation, whether by negativepressure external means (e.g. Cuirass) or positive-pressure through tracheostomy, may survive for periods considerably longer than six months unless there is a life-threatening comorbid condition, e.g. recurrent aspiration pneumonia. II. Rapid progression of ALS and critical nutritional impairment. A. Rapid progression of ALS. Please see I.A. above. B. Critical nutritional impairment. Most ALS patients develop swallowing difficulties early in the illness, so that gastrostomy feeding is reasonable. However, some patients with end-stage or rapidly-advancing ALS may choose not to undergo artificial feeding. These patients may have a prognosis of less than six months if their oral intake of nutrients and fluids is insufficient to sustain life. Nutritional impairment may be documented by: 1. Continued weight loss. 2. Dehydration or hypovolemia. III. Rapid progression of ALS and life-threatening complications. A. Rapid progression of ALS. Please see I.A. above. A-47 B. Life-threatening complications. 1. Recurrent aspiration pneumonia. This may occur whether or not the patient is receiving tube feedings. 2. Decubitus ulcers, multiple, Stage 3-4, particularly if infected. 3. Upper urinary tract infection, e.g. pyelonephritis. 4. Sepsis. 5. Fever recurrent after antibiotics. A-48 REFERENCES 1. Callahan D. Frustrated mastery -- The cultural context of death in America, in Caring for Patients at the End of Life [Special Issue]. West J Med 1995; 163:22630. 2. Christakis NA et al. Survival of Medicare patients after enrollment in hospice programs. New Eng J Med 1996;335:172-8. 3. Stuart B et al. Medical Guidelines for Determining Prognosis in Selected NonCancer Diseases. Arlington, VA: National Hospice Organization, 1995. 4. Luchins DJ et al. Criteria for enrolling dementia patients in hospice programs. In preparation. 5. Reisberg, B. Functional assessment staging (FAST). Psychopharmacology Bulletin, 1988; 24:653-659. 6. Fabiszcewski KJ et al. Effect of antibiotic treatment on outcome of fevers in institutionalized Alzheimer patients. JAMA 1990; 263:3168-72. 7. Giles TD. Optimizing the treatment of heart failure. Curr Opin Cardiol 1994;9 Suppl 1:S21-7. 8. Lynn, J et al. Accurate prognostication of death: opportunities and challenges for physicians. West J Med 1995;163:250-7. 9. Kinzbrunner, BM et al. Debility, unspecified: a terminal diagnosis. Abstract, J Palliat Care 1994; vol. 10:4:58. 10. Kinzbrunner BM. Non-malignant terminal diseases: criteria for hospice admission. Hospice Update 1993; 3:3-6. 11. Karnofsky DA et al. The use of nitrogen mustards in the palliative treatment of cancer. Cancer 1948; 1(4):634. 12. Mor V et al. The Karnofsky Performance Status Scale: an examination of its reliability and validity in a research setting. Cancer 1984; 53:2002. 13. Evans C et al. "Prognostic uncertainty in terminal care: can the Karnofsky index help?" Lancet 1985; 1:1204. 14. Katz S et al. Studies of illness in the aged. The index of ADL: a standardized measure of biological and psychosocial function. JAMA 1963;185:914. A-49 15. Donaldson LJ et al. The elderly in residential care: mortality in relation to functional capacity. J Epidemiol and Comm Health 1980; 34:96. 16. Rudman D et al. Antecedents of death in the men of a Veteran's Administration nursing home. J Am Geriatr Soc 1987; 35:496. 17. Wolinsky FD et al. Changes in functional status and the risks of subsequent nursing home placement and death. J Gerontol and Soc Sci 1993; 48(3):S94. 18. Narain F et al. Predictors of immediate and 6-month outcomes in hospitalized elderly patients: the importance of functional status. J Am Geriatr Soc 1988; 36:775. 19. Goldfarb AI et al. Predictors of mortality in the institutionalized aged. Dis Nerv System 1966; 27(1):21. 20. Lichtenstein MJ et al. Factors associated with early demise in nursing home residents: a case control study. J Am Geriatr Soc 1985; 33:315. 21. Reuben DB et al. Value of functional status as a predictor of mortality: results of a prospective study. Am J Med 1992; 93:663. 22. Clark LP et al. Taking to bed: rapid functional decline in an independently mobile older population living in an intermediate-care facility. J Am Geriatr Soc 1990; 38:967. 23. This may be a factor that independently determines early mortality in selected patients. See Siebens H et al. Correlates and consequences of eating dependency in institutionalized elderly. J Am Geriatr Soc 1986; 34:192. 24. Murden RA et al. Recent weight loss is related to short-term mortality in nursing homes. J Gen Int Med 1994; 9:648. 25. Dwyer JT et al. Changes in relative weight among institutionalized elderly adults. J Gerontol 1987; 42(3):246. 26. Marton KI et al. Involuntary weight loss: diagnostic and prognostic significance. Ann Int Med 1981; 95:568. 27. Rudman D, op. cit. 28. Corti M-C et al. Serum albumin level and physical disability as predictors of mortality in older persons. JAMA 1994; 48:1173. 29. Agrawal N et al. "Predictive ability of various nutritional variables for mortality in elderly people." Am J Clin Nutr 1988; 48:1173. A-50 30. Phillips P et al. "Grip strength, mental performance and nutritional status as indicators of mortality risk among female geriatric patients." Age and Aging 1986; 15:53. 31. Reyes AJ. Angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors in the clinical setting of chronic congestive heart failure. Am J Cardiol 1995;75:50F-55F. 32. From Nomenclature and Criteria for Diagnosis of Disease of the Heart and Great Vessels, 9th Ed., Little Brown & Co., 1993. 33. Marantz PR et al. "Prognosis in ischemic heart disease: can you tell as much at the bedside as in the nuclear laboratory?" Arch Int Med 1992; 152:2433-2437. 34. Packer M et al. Effect of carvedilol on morbidity and mortality in patients with chronic heart failure. US carvedilol heart failure study group. New Eng J Med 1996;334:1349-55. 35. Landry FJ et al. "Outcome of cardiopulmonary resuscitation in the intensive care setting." Arch Int Med 1992 Nov; 152(11):2305-8. 36. Middlekauff HR et al. "Syncope in advanced heart failure: high risk of sudden death regardless of origin of syncope." J Am Coll Cardiol 1993 Jan; 21(1):110-6. 37. Maggiorini M. "Indications for heart transplantation: preoperative assessment and treatment." Ther Umsch 1993 Jun; 50(6):434-41. 38. Kapoor WN. "Evaluation and outcome of patients with syncope." Medicine (Baltimore) 1990 May; 69(3):160-75. 39. Hornig CR et al. "Early outcome and recurrences after cardiologic brain embolism." Acta Neurol Scand 1993 Jul: 88(1):26-31. 40. Currie PF et al. "Heart muscle disease related to HIV infection: prognostic implications." Brit Med J 1994 Dec 17; 309(669):1605-7. 41. Burrows B et al. "Course and prognosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease." N Eng J Med 1969; 280:397-404. 42. Pearlman RA. "Variability of physician estimates of survival for acute respiratory failure in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.>" Chest 1987; 91(4):515-521. 43. Kaelin RM et al. "Failure to predict six-month survival of patients with COPD requiring mechanical ventilation by analysis of simple indices." Chest 1987; 92(6):971-978. A-51 44. Anthonisen NR. "Prognosis in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: results from multicenter clinical trials." Am Rev Resp Dis 1989; 140:S95-S99. 45. Hodgkin JE. "Prognosis in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease." Clin Chest Med 1990; 11:555-569. 46. Traver GA et al. "Predictors of mortality in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease." Am Rev Resp Dis 1979; 119:895-902. 47. Diener CF et al. "Further observations on the course and prognosis of chronic obstructive lung disease." Am Rev Resp Dis 1975; 111:719-724. 48. Kanner RE et al. "Predictors of survival in subjects with chronic airflow limitation." Am J Med 1983; 74:249-255. 49. Postma DS et al. "Prognosis of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: the Dutch experience." Am Rev Resp Dis 1989; 140 (Suppl):S100-S105. 50. Boushy SF et al. "Factors affecting prognosis in emphysema." Dis Chest 1964; 45:402-411. 51. France AJ et al. "Does right ventricular function predict survival in patients with chronic obstructive lung disease?" Thorax 1988; 11:423-434. 52. Kawakami Y. "Prognostic factors in COPD: the importance of pulmonary hemodynamic variables." Pract Cardiol 1985; 11:124-137. 53. Braun SR et al. "Predictive clinical value of nutritional assessment factors in COPD." Chest 1984; 85:353-357. 54. Braun SR et al. "Predictive clinical value of nutritional assessment factors in COPD." Chest 1984; 85:353-357. 55. Shih H et al. "Frequency and significance of cardiac arrhythmias in chronic obstructive lung disease." Chest 1988; 94:44-48. 56. Sahn SA et al. "Ten-year follow up of a comprehensive rehabilitation program for severe COPD." Chest 1980; 77(suppl):311-314. 57. Postma DS et al. "Prognosis in severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease." Am Rev Resp Dis 1979; 119:357-367. 58. Anthonisen NR et al. "Prognosis in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease." Am Rev Resp Dis 1986; 133:14-20. A-52 59. Katzman R et al. "The malignancy of dementia: Predictors of mortality in clinically diagnosed dementia in a population survey of Shanghai, China." Arch Neurol 1994; 51(12):1220-5. 60. Drachman DA et al. "The prognosis in Alzheimer's disease: 'how far' rather than 'how fast' best predicts the outcome." Arch Neurol 1990; 47(8):851-6. 61. Walsh JS et al. "Survival of outpatients with Alzheimer-type dementia." Ann Int Med 1990; 113(6):429-34. 62. Volicer BJ et al. "Predicting short-term survival for patients with advanced Alzheimer's disease." J Am Geriatr Soc 1993; 41:535-540. 63. Koopmans RT et al. "Multi-infarct dementia in nursing home patients: more comorbidity and shorter life expectancy than in Alzheimer's disease." Ned Tijdschr Geneeskd 1992; 136(45):2223-7. 64. Reding MJ et al. "Follow up of patients referred to a dementia service." J Am Geriatr Soc 1984; 32(4):265-8. 65. Brodaty H et al. "Time until institutionalization and death in patients with dementia." Arch Neurol 993; 50(6):643-50. 66. Reisberg B. "Functional Assessment Staging (FAST)." Psychopharmacology Bulletin, 1988; 24:653-659. 67. Reisberg B et al. "Dementia staging in chronic care populations." In Alzheimer's Disease and Associated Disorders. 1994; 8(Suppl.) S188-S205. 68. Luchins DJ, Hanrahan P and Murphy K, personal communication. Manuscript in preparation. 69. Hanrahan P et al. "Survival time among end-stage demented hospice patients." NR253, presented at annual conference of American Psychiatric Association, Miami, Florida, 1995. 70. Alexakos MJ et al. "Criteria to enroll end-stage dementia patients into hospice." NR516, presented at annual conference of American Psychiatric Association, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1994. 71. Murden RA et al. Recent weight loss is related to short-term mortality in nursing homes. J Gen Int Med 1994; 9:648. 72. Dwyer JT et al. Changes in relative weight among institutionalized elderly adults. J Gerontol 1987; 42(3):246. A-53 73. Marton KI et al. Involuntary weight loss: diagnostic and prognostic significance. Ann Int Med 1981; 95:568. 74. Rudman D et al. Antecedents of death in the men of a Veteran's Administration nursing home. J Am Geriatr Soc 1987; 35:496. 75. Corti M-C et al. Serum albumin level and physical disability as predictors of mortality in older persons. JAMA 1994; 48:1173. 76. Agrawal N et al. "Predictive ability of various nutritional variables for mortality in elderly people." Am J Clin Nutr 1988; 48:1173. 77. Phillips P et al. "Grip strength, mental performance and nutritional status as indicators of mortality risk among female geriatric patients." Age and Aging 1986; 15:53. 78. Volberding, PA. Improving the outcomes of care for patients with human immunodeficiency virus infection. New Eng J Med 1996;334(11):729-31. 79. Mellors JW et al. Prognosis in HIV-1 infection predicted by the quantity of virus in plasma. Science 1996;272:1167-1170. 80. Saag, MS et al. HIV viral load markers in clinical practice. Nature Med 1996;2(6):625-629. 81. Carpenter, CCJ, et al. Antiretroviral Therapy for HIV Infection in 1996: Recommendations of an international panel. JAMA 1996;276(2):146-154. 82. Mills,CD, Jones PD. Relationship between CD4 lymphocyte count and AIDS mortality, 1986-1991. AIDS 1993;7:1383-1386. 83. Gulick R et al. 3rd national conference on human retroviruses and related infections, Washington DC, 29 Jan 96 (abstract), p. 162. 84. Pennisi E et al. Eradicating HIV from a patient: not just a dream? Science 1996;272:1884. 85. Stone, VE et al. Relation between hospital experience and mortality for patients with AIDS. JAMA 1992;268(19):2655-2661 86. Kitahata, MM et al. Physicians' experience with the acquired immunodeficiency syndrome as a factor in patient's survival. New Eng J Med 1996;334(11):701706. 87. Mills GD & Jones PD. Relationship between CD4 lymphocyte count and AIDS mortality, 1986-1991. AIDS 1993;7:1383-6. A-54 88. Mellors JW et al, op. cit. 89. Neaton et al. Statistics in Medicine 1994; 13:2107-2125. 90. Neaton et al. Op. cit. 91. Moore RD et al. Natural history of opportunistic disease in an HIV-infected urban clinical cohort. Ann Int Med 1996;124:633-42. 92. Ibid. 93. Chin DP et al. Impact of mycobacterium avium complex bacteremia and its treatment on survival of AIDS patients: a prospective study. J Infect Dis 1994; 170-578-84. 94. Neaton et al., op cit. 95. Rao TK et al. Outcome of severe acute renal failure in patients with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome. Am J Kidney Dis 1995;25:390-8. 96. Stone HD et al. Human immunodeficiency virus-associated nephropathy: current concepts. Am J Med Sci 1994;307:212-7. 97. Moore RD et al, op. cit. 98. Ibid. 99. Sanchez-Mejorada G. Clinical patterns of diarrhea in AIDS: etiology and prognosis. Rev Invest Clin 1994;46:187-96. 100. Herrmann FR et al. Serum albumin level on admission as a predictor of death, length of stay and readmission. Arch Int Med 1992; 152:125-30. 101. Guenter P et al. Relationships among nutritional status, disease progression and survival in HIV infection. J Acq Immun Defic Synd 1993; 6:1130. 102. Chlebowski RT et al. Nutritional status, gastrointestinal dysfunction and survival in patients with AIDS. Am J Gastroenterol 1989;84:1288-93. 103. Alcabes P et al. Injection drug use and human immunodeficiency virus infection. Clin Infect Dis 1995;20:1467-79. 104. Operskalski EA et al. Human immunodeficiency virus type 1 infection: relationship of risk group and age to rate of progression to AIDS. Transfusion Safety Study Group. J Infect Dis 1995;172:648-55. A-55 105. Martin JN et al. Effect of older age on survival in human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) disease. Am J Epidemiol 1995;142:1221-30. 106. Santagostino E et al. Factors associated with progression to AIDS and mortality in a cohort of HIV-infected patients with hemophilia followed up since seroconversion. Cell Mol Biol 1995;41:371-80. 107. Diamondsstone LS et al. Prognostic factors for all-cause mortality among hemophiliacs infected with human immunodeficiency virus. J Infect Dis 1995;142:304-13. 108. Currie PF et al. "Heart muscle disease related to HIV infection: prognostic implications." Brit Med J 1994 Dec 17; 309(669):1605-7. 109. Keefe, EB. Selection of patients for liver transplantation. In Maddrey WC and Sorrell MF, eds. Transplantation of the Liver, 2nd Ed. Norwalk, CT:Appleton and Lange,1995;13-60. 110. Christensen E et. al. Updating prognosis and therapeutic effect evaluation in cirrhosis with Cox's multiple regression model for time-dependent variables. Scand J Gastroenterol 1986;21:163-74. 111. Child CG and Turcotte JG. In: Child CG. ed. The Liver and Portal Hypertension. Philadelphia: WB Saunders Co., 1964:50. 112. Pugh RNH et al. Transection of the oesophagus for bleeding oesophageal varices. Br J Surg 1973;60:646-649. 113. Albers I et al. Superiority of the Child-Pugh classification to quantitative liver function tests for assessing prognosis of liver cirrhosis. Scand J Gastroenterol 1989;24:269-76. 114. Infante-Rivard C et al. Clinical and statistical validity of conventional prognostic factors in predicting short-term survival among cirrhotics. Hepatology 1987;7:660-4. 115. Christensen E et al. Prognostic value of Child-Turcotte criteria in medically treated cirrhosis. Hepatology 1984;4:430-5. 116. LaVecchia C et al. Worldwide patterns and trends in mortality from liver cirrhosis, 1955 to 1990. Ann Epidemiol 1994;4:480-6. 117. Christensen E et. al. Updating prognosis and therapeutic effect evaluation in cirrhosis with Cox's multiple regression model for time-dependent variables. Scand J Gastroenterol 1986;21:163-74. A-56 118. Rector WG Jr. Sodium retention and ascites formation. In: Rector WG Jr., ed. Complications of Chronic Liver Disease. St. Louis, MO:Mosby-Year Book Inc.,1992;68-84. 119. Runyon BA. Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis: an explosion of information. Hepatology 1988;8:171-5. 120. Tito L et al. Recurrence of spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhosis: frequency and predictive factors. Hepatology 1988;8:27-31. 121. Toledo C et al. Spontaneous bacterial peritonitis in cirrhosis: predictive factors of infection resolution and survival in patients treated with cefotaxime. Hepatology 1993; 17:251-7. 122. Gines A et al. Incidence, predictive factors and prognosis of the hepatorenal syndrome in cirrhosis with ascites. Gastroenterology 1993;105:229-36. 123. Trey C et al. Treatment of hepatic coma by exchange blood transfusion. N Eng J Med 1966;274:473-81. 124. Gitlin N et al. The diagnosis and prevalence of subclinical hepatic encephalopathy in apparently healthy, ambulant, nonshunted patients with cirrhosis. J Hepatol 1986;3:75-82. 125. Vierling JM. Epidemiology and clinical course of liver disease: identification of candidates for liver transplantation. Hepatology 1984;4:84S-94S. 126. D'Amico G et al. Survival and prognostic indicators in compensated and decompensated cirrhosis. Dig Dis & Sci 1986;31:468-75. 127. Graham DY et al. Course of patients after variceal hemorrhage. Gastroenterology 1981;80:800-9. 128. Terblanche J et al. Controversies in the management of bleeding esophageal varices. N Eng J Med 1989;320:1393-8, 1469-75. 129. Lebrec D. Portal hypertension. In: Rector WG Jr, Ed. Complications of Chronic Liver Disease. St Louis, MO:Mosby-Year Book Inc; 1992:24-67. 130. Davis TV et al. Update on managing bleeding esophageal varices. JOM 1992;6:16-21. 131. Stiegmann GV et al. Endoscopic sclerotherapy as compared with endoscopic ligation for bleeding esophageal varices. N Eng J Med 1991;326:1527-32. A-57 132. Lebrec D. Op. cit. 133. Zemel G et al. Percutaneous transjugular portosystemic shunt. J Am Med Assoc 1991;266:390-3. 134. Qiao Z-K et al. Relationship between liver cirrhosis death rate and nutritional factors in 38 countries. Int J Epidemiol 1988;17:414-8. 135. Borowsky SA et al. Continued heavy drinking and survival in alcoholic cirrhosis. Gastroenterol 1981;104:1755-61. 136. Pande NY et al. Cirrhotic portal hypertension: morbidity of continued alcoholism. Gastroenterol 1978;74:64-9. 137. Powell WJ et al. Duration of survival in patients with Laennec's cirrhosis. Am J Med 1968;44:406-20. 138. D'Amico G et al., op. cit. 139. D'Amico G et al., op. cit. 140. Brenner BM. Brenner and Rector's The Kidney. Philadelphia, PA: WB Saunders, 1996. 141. Bonomini V. Timing dialysis in chronic uraemia. Life Support Syst 1987;5:1. 142. Port FK. End-stage renal disease: magnitude of the problem, prognosis of future trends and possible solutions. Kidney Int 1995;48:S3-S6. 143. Khanna R et al. Choosing a dialysis therapy: introduction to a mini-symposium. Am J Kidney Dis 1984;4:217. 144. Schaefer JH et al. Outcome prediction of acute renal failure in medical intensive care. Intensive Care Med 1991;17:19-24. 145. Chertow GM et al. Prognostic stratification in critically ill patients with acute renal failure requiring dialysis. Arch Int Med 1995;155:1505-11. 146. Brenner BM, op.cit. 147. Chertow GM et al, op. cit. 148. United States Renal Data System. Comorbid conditions and correlations with mortality risk among 3399 hemodialysis patients. Am J Kidney Dis 1992;20:32-8. 149. Chertow GM et al, op. cit. A-58 150. Brenner BM, op.cit. 151. Chertow GM et al, op. cit. 152. Groeneveld ABJ et al. Acute renal failure in the medical intensive care unit: predisposing and complicating factors and outcome. Nephron 1991;59:602-10. 153. United States Renal Data System, op. cit. 154. Chertow GM et al, op. cit. 155. Ibid. 156. McCarthy JT. Prognosis of patients with acute renal failure in the intensive care unit: a tale of two eras. Mayo Clin Proc 1996;71:117-26. 157. Groeneveld ABJ et al, op. cit. 158. United States Renal Data System, op. cit. 159. Ibid. 160. Ibid. 161. Chertow GM et al, op. cit. 162. Port FK, op. cit. 163. Mc Carthy JT, op. cit. 164. Groeneveld ABJ et al, op. cit. 165. United States Renal Data System, op. cit. 166. Salomone M et al. Dialysis in the elderly: improvement of survival results in the eighties. Nephrol Dial Transplant 1995;10:60-4. 167. Chertow GM et al, op. cit. 168. Ibid. 169. Shabar E et al. Improved survival of stroke patients during the 1980's: The Minnesota Stroke Survey. Stroke 1995;26:1-6. A-59 170. Gladman J et al. Predicting the outcome of acute stroke: prospective evaluation of five multivariate models and comparison with simple methods. J Neurol Neurosurg Psych 1992;55:347-51. 171. Chambers B et al. Prognosis of acute stroke. Neurology 1987;37:221-5. 172. Viitanem M et al. Determinants of long-term mortality after stroke. Acta Med Scand 1987;221:349-56. 173. Howard G et al. Community hospital-based stroke programs: North Carolina, Oregon and New York III. Factors influencing survival after stroke: proportional hazards analysis of 4219 patients. Stroke 1986:17:294-9. 174. Henley S et al. Who goes home? Predictive factors in stroke recovery. J Neurol Neurosurg Psych 1985;48:1-6. 175. Allen CMC. Predicting the outcome of acute stroke: a prognostic score. J Neurol Neurosurg Psych 1984;47:475-80. 176. Base E. Cardiopulmonary arrest: pathophysiology and neurologic complications. Ann Int Med 1985;103:920-7. 177. Dougherty J et al. Hypoxic-ischemic brain injury and the vegetative state: clinical and neuropathologic correlation. Neurology 1981;31:991-7. 178. Widjicks E et al. Prognostic value of myoclonus states in comatose survivors of cardiac arrest. Ann Neurol 1994;35:239-43. 179. Hamel MB et al. Identification of comatose patients at high risk for death or severe disability. JAMA 1995;273:1842-8. 180. Barnford J et al. The frequency, causes and timing of death within 30 days of a first stroke: The Oxfordshire Community Stroke Project. J Neurol Neurosurg Psych 1990;53:824-9. 181. Dennis M et al. Long-term survival after first-ever stroke: The Oxfordshire Community Stroke Project. Stroke 1993;24:796-800. 182. Turney T et al. The natural history of hemispheric and brainstem infarction in Rochester, Minnesota. Stroke 1984;15:790-4. 183. Wade D et al. Recovery after stroke: the first 3 months. J Neurol Neurosurg Psych 1985;48:7-13. 184. Murden RA et al. Recent weight loss is related to short-term mortality in nursing homes. J Gen Int Med 1994; 9:648. A-60 185. Dwyer JT et al. Changes in relative weight among institutionalized elderly adults. J Gerontol 1987; 42(3):246. 186. Marton KI et al. Involuntary weight loss: diagnostic and prognostic significance. Ann Int Med 1981; 95:568. 187. Rudman D et al. Antecedents of death in the men of a Veteran's Administration nursing home. J Am Geriatr Soc 1987; 35:496. 188. Corti M-C et al. Serum albumin level and physical disability as predictors of mortality in older persons. JAMA 1994; 48:1173. 189. Agrawal N et al. "Predictive ability of various nutritional variables for mortality in elderly people." Am J Clin Nutr 1988; 48:1173. 190. Phillips P et al. "Grip strength, mental performance and nutritional status as indicators of mortality risk among female geriatric patients." Age and Aging 1986; 15:53. 191. Hanrahan P et al. "Survival time among end-stage demented hospice patients." NR253, presented at annual conference of American Psychiatric Association, Miami, Florida, 1995. 192. Caroscio JT et al. Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: its natural history. Neurol Clinics 1987;5:1-8. 193. Ringel SP et al. The natural history of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Neurology 1993;43:1316-22. 194. Norris F et al. Onset, natural history and outcome in idiopathic adult motor neuron disease. J Neurol Sci 1993;118:48-55. 195. Haverkamp LJ et al. Natural history of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis in a database population. Brain 1995;118:707-19. 196. Smith RA et al. Recombinant growth hormone treatment of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Muscle Nerve 1993;16:624-33. 197. Lilienfeld DE et al. Rising mortality from motoneuron disease in the USA, 19621984. Lancet 1989;1:710-12. 198. Durrleman S et al. Increasing trends of ALS in France and elsewhere: are the changes real? Neurology 1989;39:768-73. A-61 199. Riggs JE et al. Rising mortality due to Parkinson's disease and amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: a manifestation of the competitive nature of human mortality. J Clin Epidemiol 1992;45:1007-12. 200. Bonduelle M. Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. In Vincken PJ & Bruyn GW, Eds. Handbook of Clinical Neurology. New York, Elsevier, 1973:22:281-338. 201. Appel SH et al. Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis associated clinical disorders and immunological evaluations. Arch Neurol 1986;43:234-8. 202. Mulder DW et al. Patient resistance and prognosis in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Mayo Clin Proc 1976;51:537-41. 203. Jablecki, CK, Personal communication. 204. Rosen AD. Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Arch Neurol 1978;35:638-42. 205. Haverkamp LJ et al. Op. cit. 206. Jablecki CK et al. Survival prediction in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Muscle Nerve 1989;12:833-41. 207. Norris FH et al. The administration of guanidine in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Neurology 1974;24:721-8. 208. Olarte MR. Therapeutic trials in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Adv Neurol 1982;36:555-7. 209. Andres PL et al. Quantitative motor assessment in amyotrophic lateral sclerosis. Neurology 1986;36:937-41. 210. Appel V et al. A rating scale for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: description and preliminary experience. Ann Neurol 1987;22:328-33. 211. Jablecki CK et al, op. cit. 212. Eisen A et al. Duration of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis is age dependent. Muscle Nerve 1993;16:27-32. 213. Jablecki CK et al, op. cit. 214. Adapted from Jacox A et al, Management of Cancer Pain.. US Department of Health and Human Services, AHCPR Publication No. 94-0592, March 1994. A-62 APPENDIX I. MEDICAL GUIDELINES FOR DETERMINATION OF PROGNOSIS: TYPE, STRENGTH AND CONSISTENCY OF EVIDENCE These guidelines were constructed whenever possible on the basis of evidence from the medical literature concerning early mortality in non-cancer diseases. This evidence may be grouped in the following categories:214 I. Meta-analysis of multiple, well-designed controlled studies. II. At least one well-designed experimental study. III. Well-designed, quasi-experimental studies: A. Nonrandomized controlled. B. Single group pre/post. C. Cohort. D. Time Series. E. Matched case-controlled. IV. Well-designed non-experimental studies. A. Comparative and correlational descriptive and case studies. V. Case reports and clinical examples. Strength and consistency of evidence may then be sorted as follows: A. There is evidence of Type I or consistent findings from multiple studies of Types II, III or IV. B. There is evidence of Types II, III or IV, and findings are generally consistent. C. There is evidence of Types II, III or IV, but findings are inconsistent. D. There is little or no evidence, or there is Type V evidence only. There has been no attempt in these Guidelines to classify each recommendation individually. In general, most of these Guidelines would be classified as within Group B, with a number in Groups A and C. With further more targeted research on mortality in end-stage non-cancer disease, it would be expected that Guidelines would evolve upward in this classification to Categories A or B. A-63 APPENDIX II. KARNOFSKY PERFORMANCE STATUS SCALE DEFINITIONS RATING (%) CRITERIA Normal no complaints; no evidence of disease. Able to carry on normal activity; minor signs 90 or symptoms of disease. Normal activity with effort; some signs or 80 symptoms of disease. Cares for self; unable to carry on normal Unable to work; able to live at home 70 activity or to do active work. and care for most personal needs; varying amount of assistance needed. Requires occasional assistance, but is able 60 to care for most of his personal needs. Requires considerable assistance and 50 frequent medical care. Disabled; requires special care and Unable to care for self; requires 40 assistance. equivalent of institutional or hospital care; disease may be progressing Severely disabled; hospital admission is 30 rapidly. indicated although death not imminent. Very sick; hospital admission necessary; 20 active supportive treatment necessary. Moribund; fatal processes progressing 10 rapidly. Dead 0 Oxford Textbook of Palliative Medicine, Oxford University Press. 1993;109. Able to carry on normal activity and to work; no special care needed. 100 A-64 APPENDIX III. NEW YORK HEART ASSOCIATION (NYHA) FUNCTIONAL CLASSIFICATION Class I. Class II. Class III. Class IV. Patients with cardiac disease, but without resulting limitation of physical activity. Ordinary physical activity does not cause undue fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain. Patients with cardiac disease resulting in slight limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Ordinary physical activity results in fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain. Patients with marked limitation of physical activity. They are comfortable at rest. Less than ordinary activity causes fatigue, palpitation, dyspnea, or anginal pain. Patients with cardiac disease resulting in inability to carry on any physical activity without discomfort. Symptoms of heart failure or of the anginal syndrome may be present even at rest. If any physical activity is undertaken, discomfort is increased. A-65 APPENDIX IV. FUNCTIONAL ASSESSMENT STAGING (FAST) (Check highest consecutive level of disability.) 1. No difficulty either subjectively or objectively. 2. Complains of forgetting location of objects. Subjective work difficulties. 3. Decreased job functioning evident to co-workers. Difficulty in traveling to new locations. Decreased organizational capacity.* 4. Decreased ability to perform complex tasks, e.g., planning dinner for guests, handling personal finances (such as forgetting to pay bills), difficulty marketing, etc. 5. Requires assistance in choosing proper clothing to wear for the day, season or occasion, e.g., patient may wear the same clothing repeatedly, unless supervised.* 6. A. Improperly putting on clothes without assistance or cueing (e.g., may put street clothes on over night clothes, or put shoes on wrong feet, or have difficulty buttoning clothing) occasionally or more frequently over the past weeks. B. Unable to bathe properly (e.g., difficulty adjusting bath-water temperature) occasionally or more frequently over the past weeks.* C. Inability to handle mechanics of toileting (e.g., forgets to flush the toilet, does not wipe properly or properly dispose of toilet tissue) occasionally or more frequently over the past weeks.* D. Urinary incontinence (occasionally or more frequently over the past weeks).* E. Fecal incontinence (occasionally or more frequently over the past weeks).* 7. A. Ability to speak limited to approximately a half a dozen intelligible different words or fewer, in the course of an average day or in the course of an intensive interview. B. Speech ability is limted to the use of a single intelligible word in an average day or in the course of an intensive interview (the person may repeat the word over and over). C. Ambulatory ability is lost (cannot walk without personal assistance). A-66 D. Cannot sit up without assistance (e.g., the individual will fall over if there are not lateral rests [arms] on the chair). E. Loss of ability to smile. F. Loss of ability to hold up head independently. * Score primarily on the basis of information obtained from acknowledgeable informant and/or category. Reisberg, B. Functional assessment staging (FAST). Psychoparamacology Bulletin, 1988; 24:653-659. A-67 APPENDIX VI. DIAGNOSTIC IMAGINGFACTORS INDICATING POOR PROGNOSIS AFTER STROKE A. For non-traumatic hemorrhagic stroke: 1. Large-volume hemorrhage on CT: a. Infratentorial: > 20 ml.213 b. Supratentorial: > 50 ml.213, 213 2. Ventricular extension of hemorrhage.213 3. Surface area of involvement of hemorrhage > 30% of cerebrum.213 4. Midline shift > 1.5 cm.213,213 5. Obstructive hydrocephalus in patient who declines, or is not a candidate for, ventriculoperitoneal shunt.213 B. For thrombotic/embolic stroke: 1. 2. 3. 4. Large anterior infarcts with both cortical and subcortical involvement.213 Large bihemispherric infarcts.213,213 Basilar artery occlusion.213,213 Bilateral vertebral artery occlusion.213,213 A-68 APPENDIX D. WISCONSIN STATE GUIDELINES FOR MEDICARE HOSPICE CARE PROVISION IN THE NURSING HOME4 Tommy G. Thompson Governor Joe Leean Secretary Division of Health State of Wisconsin Department of Health and Social Services Date: January 19, 1996 To: Hospices Nursing Homes From: Judy Fryback, Director Bureau of Quality Compliance 1 West Wilson Street P.O. Box 309 Madison, WI 53701-0309 BQC-96-002 HSPCE _2_ NH _1_ Guidelines for Care Coordination for Hospice Patients Who Reside in Nursing Facilities Regulatory concerns have resulted about the appropriate application of nursing home and hospice regulations to nursing home residents who have elected hospice services. To respnd to these concerns, and to promote compliance with both the nursing home and hospice requirements, representatives from the Wisconsin Health Care Association (WHCA), the Wisconsin Association of Homes and Services for the Aging (WAHSA), the Hospice Organization of Wisconsin (HOW) and the Bureau of Quality Compliance (BQC) met as a workgroup to assess these concerns and to develop a protocol to resolve them. The protocol that was developed is attached for your review. One of the most significant problems identified was the nursing home regulation that requires a new Resident Assessment Instrument (RAI) when there are significant changes in a resident's or patient's condition. The workgroup developed a document called "MDS/RAP--Change of Condition," to guide care planning and to address the RAI requirements for hospice residents/ patients residing in nursing homes. This document is intended to be a tool to facilitiate the provision and coordination of care in a consistent manner, while meeting the intent of hospice and long term care regulatory requirements. 4 Reprinted with permission of the Hospice Organization of Wisconsin, all rights reserved. A-69 The use of this comprehensive document as a tool in planning services for hospice patients residing in nursing facilities should facilitate the coordination of care and benefit patient care. The Bureau of Quality Compliance, along with the three associations, is planning a statewide training the implementation of these guidelines in the spring of 1996. Please share this information with your staff. Questions regarding this information can be directed to either Barbara Woodford, Nurse Consultant, Provider Regulation Section at (608) 264-9896; or Richard Cooperrider, Supervisor, Community Based Provider Program, at (608) 267-7389. JF/RC/BW/jh 96002.nm A-70 NURSING HOME/HOSPICE INTERFACE Guidelines For Care Coordination For Hospice Patients Who Reside in Nursing Facilities This document was jointly produced by representatives of the Wisconsin Health Care Association (WHCA), the Wisconsin Association of Homes and Services for the Aging (WAHSA), and the Hospice Organization of Wisconsin (HOW). All rights reserved. No portion may be reproduced without written permission of these organizations. October 1995 A-71 CONTENTS SECTION I. Introduction and Background ............................................................ 73 SECTION II. Regulatory References ....................................................................... 74 SECTION III. Contract Considerations for Hospices and Nursing Homes .................................................................................................. 75 SECTION IV. Clinical Protocol Development .......................................................... 84 A. Priority Areas ................................................................................... 84 B. Plan of Care..................................................................................... 88 1. MDS Care Plan Process .......................................................... 89 2. Examples ................................................................................. 94 (a) Exhibit A........................................................................ 94 (b) Exhibit B........................................................................ 95 SECTION V. Guidelines for Inservice/Education Planning ................................... 98 SECTION VI. Conclusion and Acknowledgments................................................. 101 A-72 SECTION I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND Persons who are eligible to access their hospice entitlement have the right to receive those services in their primary place of residence. For some individuals, their place of residence may be a nursing home. In order to protect access to hospice care for nursing home residents in Wisconsin, a statewide task force was formed in June of 1994. This task force consisted of representatives of the hospice and nursing home industries across the state. Initially, representatives from WHCA, WAHSA, and HOW met to discuss problems arising in the interface between hospice and nursing homes. Most of these problems result from differences in the application of both nursing home and hospice regulations to those nursing home residents who have elected hospice services. A clinical workgroup was appointed to address what many considered the most pressing problem in the hospice/nursing home interface: anticipated changes in patient condition which could potentially trigger the need for a new Minimum Data Set (MDS), as required by nursing home regulations. This workgroup developed a draft MDS/RAP change of condition document to guide care planning and address MDS regulatory requirements for nursing home residents who elect hospice services. The draft was presented to representatives from the Wisconsin Division of Health, Bureau of Quality Compliance, who were favorably impressed and recommended field testing of the document. Field testing commenced in the fall of 1994 following distribution of the document to all Wisconsin hospices and nursing homes that are members of the three statewide organizations. It concluded six months later. Minor changes recommended as a result of the field testing were incorporated into Section IV.B. (MDS Care Plan Process). Concurrent with field testing, this work group continued to meet to address other clinical issues. Two additional work groups were formed to address other significant issues impacting coordination of hospice care in the nursing home. One work group was given the task of developing guidelines to deal with contractual issues; the other work group dealt with educational issues. These three work groups' efforts comprise the Clinical Protocols, Contract, and Education sections of the guidelines. This comprehensive document is not intended to be a "blueprint" for providers, but rather a tool to facilitate care coordination in a consistent manner, while maintaining regulatory compliance. Nursing homes and hospices engaging in collaborative arrangements are encouraged to structure their individual relationships in a manner that reflects their unique mission, community needs, and patient populations. The Bureau of Quality Compliance reviewed this document in October of 1995 and determined that it meets both hospice and nursing home regulations in the State of Wisconsin. A-73 SECTION II. REGULATORY REFERENCES Protocols and guidelines outlined in this document were developed with consideration for existing state and federal regulations. References include: 42 CFR Part 418, Hospice Health Care Financing Administration (HCFA), State Operations Manual and Hospice Interpretive Guidelines Chapter HSS 131, Hospices, Wisconsin Administrative Code Chapter HSS 132, Nursing Home Rules, Wisconsin Administrative Code 42 CFR Part 483, Medicare and Medicaid; Requirements For Long Term Facilities A-74 SECTION III. CONTRACT CONSIDERATIONS FOR HOSPICES AND NURSING HOMES Introduction The following list of key considerations during hospice/nursing home contract negotiations is meant to assist providers in effectively coordinating provider services to the hospice patient receiving routine home care who resides in a nursing home. While by no means all-inclusive, these factors reflect many provisions found in the hospice and nursing home regulations and were compiled from comments and guidance distributed by authoritative state (Bureau of Quality Compliance) and federal (Health Care Financing Administration) sources. The information which follows is specifically pertinent to the routine home care contract. It is not intended to comprehensively address considerations for inpatient and respite care, which hospices and nursing homes may elect to include as part of the same contract or as separate contracts. Providers are encouraged to review the following contract considerations, but since the listing is not exhaustive, are cautioned to also review their respective regulations, insurance and liability concerns, financial position and attorney's advice prior to entering into any formal contract. ****** CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE HOSPICE "ROUTINE HOME CARE" CONTRACT I. Administrative Concerns and Core Services Requirements a. The hospice/nursing home agreement must be in writing. b. The written agreement must specify that (1) the hospice takes full responsibility for professional management of the patient's hospice care, and (2) the nursing home provides room and board. c. Hospice must provide the same services otherwise offered if the patient was in a private residence, including necessary medical services and inpatient care arrangements. d. Identify a dispute resolution mechanism to be utilized in the event of disputes. e. Hospice may not discharge a hospice patient at its discretion, even if care promises to be costly or inconvenient. f. Statute/regulation prohibits a hospice from discontinuing care due to inability of the patient to pay for care. A-75 g. References to specific government agencies can often be misleading and should be omitted from contract language. Refer more generally to "state" (or "federal") regulations, rather than "HCFA," "BQC," etc. h. Admission criteria and requirements must be identical for all individuals regardless of pay source. i. Specify the exact services, and extent of services, that will be provided individually by the hospice and nursing home. j. Specify the exact responsibilities of each provider in the provision, and coordination, of care and services. k. Substantially all core services must be routinely provided "directly" by hospice employees, and must not be delegated. (Interpretation of "directly" is that the person providing the service for the hospice is a hospice "employee." "Employee" includes paid staff and volunteers under the jurisdiction of the hospice (see 42CFR 418.3). l. Hospice must provide the following core services through its own employees: • physician services • nursing services • medical social services • counseling services m. Hospice may not contract with the nursing home to provide core services. n. The nursing home may provide non-core services, if hospice assumes management responsibility for these services, and, assures that these services are performed in accord with hospice policy and the plan of care. o. Room and board services to be provided by the nursing home include: • personal care services • assistance with ADLs • administration of medications • social activities • room cleanliness • supervision/assistance with DME use and prescribed therapies p. Hospice must include the patient's primary physician in the care planning process. q. Hospice certification and licensure does not require designation of a primary caregiver, although individual hospices can require this as a prerequisite to admission. A-76 r. Identify the terms and procedure for formal review and renewal of the hospice/nursing home relationship on a regular basis. II. Coordination of Services a. At the time each hospice patient/resident is admitted to the facility, the nursing home must have physician orders for the person's immediate care. b. Both providers must specify who obtains, and who retains, the supply of emergency medications. c. All information relevant to the patient's care must be shared and contained in the medical records compiled by both the hospice and nursing home. (Caution: The term "relevant" must be interpreted broadly enough to avoid inadvertently failing to share marginally relevant information.) d. Except where dictated by state or federal regulations, identify which provider will retain "originals" and which provider will retain "copies" of pertinent documents in the medical record. e. Specify a procedure for the prompt and orderly relay of general information, MD orders, etc., between the providers. f. Specify a procedure that clearly outlines the chain of communication between the hospice and nursing home in the event a crisis or emergency develops. g. Identify who will be responsible for completing various parts of the MDS document. (It is, ultimately, the responsibility of the nursing home to make sure the MDS is completed, signed and dated.) h. Indicate whether hospice patients will be allowed to use their own medications. If so, the expiration date and labelling requirements of HSS 132 must be satisfied. i. The hospice and nursing home must jointly coordinate, establish, and agree upon a single plan of care to be used by both providers. This coordinated single plan of care must be implemented according to accepted professional standards of practice. j. The coordinated plan of care must specifically identify the respective care and services which the nursing home and hospice will provide. k. Aside from responsibilities that are part of the core requirements, include a statement that the plan of care must specify who is responsible for carrying out various patient interventions. A-77 l. Specify the chain of communication to be followed between the hospice and nursing home whenever a change of condition occurs and/or changes to the plan of care are indicated. m. All changes in the plan of care must be immediately communicated to the other provider. n. Each provider must be aware of the other's responsibilities in implementing the plan of care. o. Hospice must ensure that hospice services are always provided in accordance with the plan of care, in all settings. p. Hospice may involve nursing home personnel in administration of prescribed therapies in the patient's plan of care only to the extent that hospice would routinely utilize the patient's family/caregiver in implementing the plan of care. q. Hospice is responsible for making all inpatient care arrangements. III. Employment Issues a. A key consideration for both the hospice and nursing home is the extent to which services will be directly provided by hospice with its own staff, since hospice receives the payment. b. A hospice may use contracted employees for core services only during: • periods of peak patient load • extraordinary circumstances c. Nursing home employees may also be employed by the hospice to serve hospice patients. d. For purposes of a hospice, "employee" is defined in 42 CFR 418.3. e. Essential requirements for nursing home employees who are also employed by hospice to perform core services include: • accurate time records • clear delineation of responsibilities (intent is to avoid allegations of dual reimbursement.) IV. Reimbursement Issues The following chart briefly summarizes various reimbursement mechanisms for hospice care provided in a nursing home: A-78 Medicaid T.19 pays hospice rate for routine home care plus room and board at 95% of nursing home's Medicaid rate. Hospice reimburses nursing home in accordance with contract. (NOTE: Hospice may contract with nursing home for services covered by hospice (e.g., supplies, pharmacy, DME, OT, PT, speech, CNAs). Reimbursement Medicare/Medicaid (Dual Entitlees) T.18 pays hospice rate for routine home care. Medicare Patient must either* T.19 pays hospice at 95% of nursing home's Medicaid rate. Hospice reimburses nursing home in accordance with contract. (NOTE: Hospice may contract with nursing home for services covered by hospice (e.g., supplies, pharmacy, DME, OT, PT, speech, CNAs). Elect the Medicare Hospice Benefit (Medicare pays hospice routine home care, and nursing home bills patient or private insurance); Private Pay/ Insurance Nursing home bills patient or private insurance. Hospice bills patient or private insurance. or, Elect normal Medicare (revoke hospice benefit). Nursing home bills Medicare. Hospice may provide service and bill patient or private insurance. * In rare cases, if it can be demonstrated that skilled nursing care as defined by Medicare is needed for care not related to the terminal illness, Medicare Part A will pay for nursing home care under normal Part A Medicare and hospice care under the Medicare Hospice Benefit. *************** A-79 SAMPLE PROVISIONS FOR INCLUSION IN A HOSPICE/NURSING HOME CONTRACT Developed by Jan A. Erickson, Director of Legal Services, Wisconsin Health Care Association; and Mary H. Michal, Shareholder, Reinhart, Boerner, Van Deuren, Norris & Rieselbach, S.C. On behalf of the Hospice/Nursing Home Task Force, the following sample contract provisions have been compiled for review or use by providers when developing the format of a hospice-nursing home contract. Since it is essential that the contract process be individualized to best meet the particular circumstances of the contracting parties, these sample provisions are intended for general reference only. This document does not purport to be all-inclusive or "model" in nature. It will likely need to be changed in at least several respects to accurately conform to the intentions of each party. For example, exact terms used in the "Definitions" section will probably vary among providers and certain other sections might be more easily addressed in combination under one general topic heading. In addition, providers may prefer to include additional provisions and sections which are not included among the samples in order to provide greater detail and clarity to their agreement. Therefore, while providers should feel free to review these sample provisions (as well as others) during preliminary contract negotiations, the format of their actual contract should always reflect the individuality of their specific relationship. *************** A-80 RECITALS Definitions (particularized to individual needs and terminology): Attending Physician Care Manager Covered Services Facility Hospice Hospice Care Hospice Medical Director Hospice Services − Routine Home Care − Inpatient Respite Care − Continuous Care − Inpatient Acute Care Informed Consent Interdisciplinary Group Non-covered Services Nursing Home Medical Director Patient Care Management Plan of Care Residential Hospice Patient Respite Care Room and Board Services Other Pertinent Definitions as Identified by the Parties Eligible Residents (criteria): Medicaid Eligible Medicare Eligible Medicaid/Medicare (Dual Entitlees) Private Insurance or HMO Private Pay Other Pertinent Sections As Identified By The Parties Coordination of Services: Admission Procedures (general process, written orders, authorizations) Patient Care Management (decision process, delegation of responsibility) Continuity of Care (transfers between levels of care, actions requiring patient notice) Communication Process (detail the process generally and for emergencies) − notification of MD (change of condition, death, etc.) − notification of hospice Interdisciplinary Team Meetings Quality Assurance Program Drugs and Pharmaceuticals Medical Equipment and Medical Supplies Transportation and Ambulance Family Services and Bereavement Care Other Pertinent Sections As Identified By The Parties A-81 Hospice Duties, Responsibilities and Services: Hospice Services (general coverage under Routine Home Care) Provision of Core Services Compliance with Law (including licensure, staff qualifications) Hospice Patient Care Management Management of the Terminal Illness: Plan of Care Medical Orders: Responsibilities of Attending Physician Medical Order Procedures Documentation (clarification of respective duties, location of original medical record) Confidentiality of Medical Record Orientation and Education Other Pertinent Sections As Identified By The Parties Facility Duties, Responsibilities and Services: Facility Services (generally, room and board, specific services, plan of care, cooperation with hospice in identified areas, bedhold policy) Compliance with Law (including licensure, staff qualifications) Availability of Nursing Home Care (hours of care, adequate services, personnel) Documentation (clarification of respective duties, location of original medical record) Facility Staff Privileges: Hospice Medical Director Access to Documents (medical/business records, federal record retention requirements for facility, subcontractors) Orientation and Education Other Pertinent Sections As Identified By The Parties Financial Responsibility: Responsibility of the Hospice Responsibility of the Facility Reimbursement − Medicaid Patients − Medicare Patients − Medicaid/Medicare Patients − Private Pay/Insurance Patients Purchase of Services by the Hospice from the Facility Other Pertinent Sections As Identified By The Parties Insurance and Indemnification Joint Review of Hospice Services (quality, appropriateness) Compliance with Government Regulations Relationship Between the Parties A-82 Conflict Resolution Process Term of the Agreement (length, renewals) Termination of the Agreement (for cause/without cause, events precipitating, regulatory implications, resident transfers and single-case continuation agreements, resident notice timeframes) Amendments to the Agreement Notice Requirements (form, method, delivery) Miscellaneous (including Non-discrimination Policy) Other Pertinent Sections As Identified By The Parties Appendices (if desired, may include references to provider policies, clinical protocols and procedures; see also: "Clinical Protocols" and "Educational Planning" documents for possible policies and protocols.) The preceding information and documents were developed and compiled by Attorney Jan A. Erickson, Director of Legal Services for Wisconsin Health Care Association, and Attorney Mary H. Michal, a Partner in the law firm of Reinhart, Boener, van Deuren, Norns & Rieselbach, S.C., for the Wisconsin Hospice Nursing Home Task Force. These items may not be reproduced without the express written consent of either one of the authors, Hospice Organization of Wisconsin, or Wisconsin Health Care Association. A-83 SECTION IV. CLINICAL PROTOCOL DEVELOPMENT Effective coordination of care that assures patient needs as well as regulatory requirements are met, necessitates careful planning by both the nursing home and the hospice. The development of policies and protocols that define care coordination issues is essential to ensure consistent quality. A. PRIORITY AREAS Priority areas have been identified for consideration in the development of clinical protocols: Admission process Physician orders Supplies and Medications Medical Record Management Hospice Core Services Death Event Quality Assurance Emergency Care Admission Process: Protocols should be developed that clarify the process of admitting a current nursing home resident to the hospice program, a current hospice patient to the nursing home, and lastly for the simultaneous admission of a patient that is new to both the hospice and the nursing home. ADMISSION: REFERRAL OF NURSING HOME RESIDENT TO HOSPICE • Referral of resident made to Hospice • Consult/information provided by Hospice • Agreement obtained to pursue admission to Hospice care • Hospice secures orders from the physician and manages orders from this point • Change of condition MDS and RAP are completed. Hospice and nursing home begin care planning jointly. • Nursing home applies from HSS 132 waiver. ADMISSION: REFERRAL OF HOSPICE PATIENT TO NURSING HOME • Referral to nursing home: the hospice may initiate contact with the nursing home and facilitates communication between the patient/family and the nursing home representative. A-84 • Hospice and the nursing home coordinate securing required admission paperwork (i.e.: history and physical, TB screening, physician orders, etc.) • Nursing home applies for HSS 132 waiver • Transfer to patient to nursing home: hospice involvement begins on day of transfer • MDS and revision of care plan initiated jointly by nursing home/hospice ADMISSION: SIMULTANEOUS REFERRAL TO NURSING HOME/HOSPICE • Referrals made to hospice and nursing home • Hospice and nursing home coordinate the admission process and required paperwork • Nursing home applies for HSS 132 waiver • Transfer of patient to nursing home. Hospice involvement begins on day of transfer. • MDS and initiation of joint care plan by hospice and nursing home Physician Orders: Hospice is responsible for securing medical orders and assuring they are consistent with the hospice philosophy. • Standing orders are obtained by the hospice and provided to the nursing home. These orders are initiated by the hospice according to patient need. • Nursing home standing orders may be utilized (based on contract), provided they are consistent with the hospice philosophy and specified on the plan of care. • All verbal, phone and written orders must be preauthorized by hospice before initiated. • Lab tests or other diagnostics related to terminal illness must be approved by hospice and specified on the plan of care • Nursing home coordinates the scheduling of routine physician visits (and/or nurse practitioner visits). Under state and federal law applicable to nursing homes, a nurse practitioner may be utilized after 30 days of the first 90 days, and A-85 after 60 days thereafter. "Certified Registered Nurse Hospice" (CRNH) does not qualify as an advanced practice nurse. • Nursing home nurse may accept orders from a hospice nurse as prescribed by the physician. Supplies and Medication/Contracted Services: Supplies and medications related to the management of the terminal illness are the responsibility of the hospice. The nursing home and hospice shoudl coordinate obtaining and monitoring the following supplies and services according to the terms of their contract: • Prescription medications related to the terminal illness (medications supplied by hospice must meet nursing home pharmacy labeling requirements) • Durable medical equipment (DME), i.e. W/C, walker, bath bench, commode, oxygen, etc. • Disposable medical supplies related to the terminal illness, as specified in the plan of care. • Provision of contracted services such as physical therapy, occupational therapy, speech therapy, dietary, etc., should be specified on the plan of care and clarified in the contract. Medical Record Management: • Copies of physician orders and coordinated plan of care should be on medical records of both organizations. The location of the original orders should be based on the contract. • Copies of hospice informed consent and current physician certification must be on nursing home chart. • Original MDS/RAP stays with nursing home record. • The patient's record in the nursing home will be identified as a hospice patient. • If specified in contract, both the hospice and nursing home retain copies of the other's record following death or discharge of a hospice patient. • All clinical information (orders, data assessments, etc.) obtained by both providers that is relevant to the hospice patient's care while a resident must be on both patient's records. A-86 Hospice Core Services: Core services as defined in the Federal Register includes nursing services, medical social services, physician services (medical director), and counseling services. These services are to be provided routinely by the hospice employees. Nursing services − Nursing care is a core service of hospice for assessment, intervention, and evaluation. − The hospice of prescribed interventions if specified in the plan of care. Medical Social Services − Social services is a core service of hospice for assessment, intervention, and evaluation related to the terminal illness. − Other social service interventions may be provided collaboratively by hospice and nursing home social workers based on the plan of care. Counseling Services − Counseling is a core service of hospice for assessment, intervention, and evaluation related to the terminal illness (type of counseling is defined by individual hospice). − Additional counseling interventions may be provided collaboratively by the hospice and nursing home staff based on the plan of care. Physician Services − Physician Services is a core service of hospice for assessment and evaluation. − Physician participation may be provided by the medical director, the attending physician, a consulting physician, or their designees. Other (non-core) services − CNA/HHA services should be provided collaboratively by the hospice and nursing home based on patient need and specified in the plan of care (clarify in contract). A-87 − Volunteer services are to be coordinated by the hospice but may be provided collaboratively by the hospice and nursing home as specified in the plan of care (clarify volunteer role in contract, especially related to hands-on care). Death Event: Protocols should be established that define mutual responsibilities at the time of death: • The hospice must be notified. • Review state and facility guidelines regarding coroner involvement, and follow protocol specified in contract for notification. • Nursing home and hospice coordinate notification of physician for release of body when heart rate and respirations have ceased. • Medication disposal. Quality Assurance: • The nursing home and hospice are required to implement quality assurance activities per respective regulations. • A collaborative approach to problem solving and outcome monitoring is encouraged for inter-related issues. Emergency Care: Emergency care is defined as unexpected and may be related or unrelated to the terminal illness. • Care should be consistent with the patient's stated wishes in the advance directive, and the physician's order with regard to code status. • Nursing home staff provide immediate care in conjunction with facility policy and/or based on plan of care. • Nursing home staff to call hospice immediately for change of condition and further assessment and revision of plan of care. B. PLAN OF CARE The nursing home and hospice must coordinate, establish, and agree upon one plan of care for both providers which reflects the hospice philosophy, and is based on A-88 the inidividual's needs and unique living situation in the nursing home. Each nursing home and hospice should develop policies and protocols to accomplish the MDS/RAP care plan process. 1. MDS CARE PLAN PROCESS General Framework for Decision-Making: Nursing homes are required to complete a minimum data set (MDS) for residents upon admission to the nursing facility. The MDS is to be reviewed and updated quarterly and annually. In addition, a new MDS is to be generated upon a change of patient condition. There are a series of criteria which, when present in a patient in various combinations or alone, can trigger the need to generate a new MDS. Recommendation #1: The task force recognized the importance of the initial MDS, as well as the quarterly and annual reviews of the MDS, and strongly encouraged that this information be shared, if not jointly developed, by the hospice and nursing home. It is essential that the hospice core team and the nursing home staff both device patient care decisions from the same core set of patient data. The task force reviewed the fact that many of the patient-change criteria that can trigger the need for generation of a new MDS for a terminally ill or dying patient are, in fact, changes that are a natural, expected outcome of the progression of a terminal illness and/or the dying process. In these situations, the patient care benefits of generating a new MDS are minimal at best, and are far outweighed by the intrusion to the patient that the process of developing a new MDS entails. To address this fact, the task force developed the following statement to govern the decision-making process relating to a change-of-condition MDS. Recommendation #2: When a patient changes from a maintenance/curative course of care to hospice palliative, the initial change-of-condition minimum data set (MDS) is the final change of condition are anticipated and documented as part of the progression of the terminal illness and/or dying process. Quarterly and annual reviews are still required. A-89 Illustrated as a process, this statement would look as follows: TRIGGER Change in Patient Condition (after hospice election) NOTIFY AND REVIEW Nursing home reports change to hospice and initiates a RAP review jointly with hospice staff DECISION The hospice and nursing home staffs make a two-fold determination: (a) is the change in condition related to the progression of the terminal illness?, and (b) was the change already anticipated and documented on the MDS? ACTION If "YES" to both questions: If "NO" to one or both questions: No new MDS generated; hospice and nursing home staff address change through plan of care New MDS must be generated by the nursing home staff and/or hospice and shared by the two agencies It was the consensus of the task force that revisions could be made in a provider's approach to the MDS process that would protect quality of care for patients by forcing a review of the patient condition against the changes expected and documented as part of the progression of the terminal illness and/or dying process, without triggering in a rote manner an intrusive MDS that, in many instances, is of little value in the care of the terminally ill patient electing hospice. Patient Change of Condition: The task force reviewed, in the context of the hospice philosophy and experience, various elements of the nursing home MDS and discussed how each one relates to the progression of the terminal illness and/or dying process. Elements subject to a change in condition were divided into three categories, detailed below. Guidelines to govern the decision-making process for determination of whether a new MDS is to be generated are outlined in the following paragraphs. A-90 Category Potential expected outcomes of the progression of the terminal illness and/or dying process Problem Areas Delirium Use of psychotropic drugs Pressure ulcers Dental care Urinary incontinence (including catheter) Behavior Problems Falls (patient at risk for) Cognitive loss/dementia Communication Expected outcome of the progression of terminal illness and/or dying process Deydration and fluid maintenance Psychosocial changes Activities of daily living (ADL) Mood states Activities Nutritional status Visual function Specials Physical restraints Feeding tubes Potential, Expected Outcomes: Certain changes in patient condition are potential, expected outcomes of the progression of the terminal illness and/or dying process. That is, while they may not be present in every terminally ill or dying patient, these changes are not unexpected and are routinely addressed by hospice personnel in the regular course of care. The fact that one of these changes should not, in the opinion of the task force, trigger a change of condition MDS provided that the change is related to the terminal illness and/or dying process, is anticipated and is documented. The value of the information generated through a change of condition MDS is of very limited value in reshaping care provided to the terminally ill or dying patient. At the time the change in condition presents in the hospice patient residing in the nursing home, a determination should be made as to whether the change is related to the terminal illness or dying process, and whether it has been documented. If so, then a new MDS would not be triggered but, rather, the change of condition would be addressed by the hospice interdisciplinary team through the plan of care. In evaluating the change of condition, the elements of the change as set out in Appendix F of the HCFA Nursing Home Manual should be reviewed by the nursing home staff with the hospice staff. It was understood by the task force that the hospice staff will not have working familiarity with the Manual or its criteria; this process will necessarily involve the expertise of the nursing home staff and underscores the importance of the review being a joint effort. The following grid provides sample statements that include the minimum elements to be reviewed under each RAP problem area listed. Additional elements for review may be included based on an assessment of individual patient circumstances. A-91 RAP Problem Area Delirium Elements of Review Assess medication, psychosocial state and sensory loss. Use of psychotropic drugs Assess medications (drug review) and side effects of medication. Adjuvant drug therapy will be utilized to provide palliative symptom management. The risk-benefit ratio evaluation regarding drug initiation and continued use, including use outside the guidelines, will be assessed by the hospice IDT/IDG and nursing home staff and documented on the clinical record by the nursing home staff. Pressure ulcers Assess pressure ulcer versus stasis, review skin integrity. Dental care Dental care to increase comfort may be undertaken; preventive dental care not an unexpected part of the plan of care. Urinary incontinence (including catheter) Reduced output is a given in the progression of the terminal illness and dying process. Assess UTI, fecal impaction, CUA, diabetes, medication. Behavior problems Assess volatility of mood, medications, and cognitive status. Falls (patient at risk for) Safety issues can be anticipated because of physical deterioration with a terminal illness and associated adjuvant drug therapy. Assess medications, appliances, and environment. Cognitive loss/dementia Assess functional limitations, sensory impairment, medication involvement factors, and failure to thrive. Communication Assess components of communication, including strengths and weaknesses, and medication. Expected Outcomes: Certain changes in patient condition are not only expected but are a given outcome with a high probability of occurring as part of the progression of the terminal illness and/or dying process. There are no identifiable benefits of triggering a change-ofcondition MDS on these criteria, provided that the hospice and nursing home staffs (1) have jointly reviewed the criteria and determined that the change of condition is linked to the terminal illness and/or dying process, and (2) this review and determination has been documented in the clinical records. Seven of the RAP problem areas are believed by the task force to be given outcomes of the progression of the terminal illness and/or dying process. The task force discussed each area and the following sample statements were developed to address the respective RAP problem areas listed. Dehydration and fluid maintenance - Changes in hydration status and fluid balance will occur as part of the progression of the terminal illness and/or dying process; so long as the change noted in the patient is related to that progression, the benefits of generating a change- of-condition MDS are minimal in terms of patient care and do not outweigh the intrusion of conducting the MDS. A-92 Psychosocial changes - Changes in lifestyle and interactions will occur as part of the progression of the terminal illness and/or dying process. Activities of daily living (ADL) - The hospice patient residing in the nursing home will become progressively more dependent on his or her activities of daily living as part of the progression of the terminal illness and/or dying process. Mood states - The person experiencing a terminal illness, from diagnosis to death, is anticipated to have emotional fluctuations. Activities - A decrease in or non-involvement in activities is an expected outcome of the progression of the terminal illness and/or dying process. Nutritional status - Declining nutritional status with progressive weight loss is expected in a terminal illness. Visual function - A decrease in visual function is anticipated with the dying process. Special Circumstances: Changes in patient condition which present the potential need for feeding tubes or physical restraints warrant special consideration in the judgment of the task force. Both can be classified as potential expected outcomes of the progression of the terminal illness and/or dying process; yet they are of such a nature as to merit different elements of review. Physical restraints - The least restrictive use of physical restraints only is to be applied to enable the resident to maintain his or her highest level of functioning. This is consistent with the guidelines set forth in the HCFA Nursing Home Manual, Appendix F. Feeding tubes - The hospice will discuss the use of feeding tubes with the patient/family as the terminal illness progresses and initiate enteral/perenteral feeding at patient/family request as consistent with the philosophy of the individual hospice. Provided that the need for use of physical restraints or feeding tubes is driven by the progression of the terminal illness and/or dying process, it is the belief of the task force that these changes should not alone trigger a change-of-condition MDS. A-93 2. EXAMPLES Exhibit A: Subject: Nursing Home Setting Title: Plan of Care Policy: Hospice and nursing home will establish one individualized Plan of Care for the hospice patient/family in the Nursing Home Setting. Purpose: To plan for quality hospice care. Special Instructions: 1. Upon admission to hospice, the initial Plan of Care will be developed by hospice and charted. 2. Nursing home resident to hospice: Hospice will do assessment and gather information from existing Plan of Care and nursing home staff. Hospice and nursing home will jointly establish the Plan of Care. Nursing home staff will initiate change-of-condition MDS/RAP as care changes focus from curative/maintenance to palliative. Hospice patient to nursing home: Hospice/nursing home will develop a Plan of Care. Nursing home will initiate change-of-care focus MDS/RAP and gather information from hospice. 3. At initial interdisciplinary team conference after nursing home admission, hospice will address the RAP problem areas and document anticipated potential patient outcomes based on terminal disease progression and dying process on form NH 021. A copy will be placed on nursing home chart. 4. Hospice will attend 14-day MDS/RAP review after notification by nursing home. 5. At interdisciplinary team meeting following MDS/RAP review, the triggered RAP areas will be addressed by hospice interdisciplinary/nursing home team meeting with problems opened or rationale for not opening documented on form NH 021 with copy on nursing home chart. 6. When a new problem is opened, hospice will document on interdisciplinary team minutes form if anticipated and related to terminal illness or if unrelated to terminal illness and provide a copy for nursing home chart. A-94 7. Hospice will participate in nursing home quarterly review of MDS and Care Plan. Hospice Executive Director Date Nursing Home CEO Date * Example reproduced with permission of Hospice of Portage County. Exhibit B: Care Plan Process Purpose: To delineate responsibility for development of one plan of care in order to meet federal regulations of both nursing home and hospice. Policy: Hospice patient residing at the nursing home will have one plan of care developed jointly by both staffs. Procedure: I. Three Different Categories of Patients A. NEW PATIENT TO BOTH HOSPICE AND NURSING HOME 1. Nursing home does initial nursing plan of care within 24 hours. 2. Hospice-assessing RN writes on nursing home initial plan of care and brings copy back to hospice. 3. If hospice social worker has plan of care completed, assessing hospice RN brings copy of plan of care to nursing home to be filed with initial plan of care. 4. Proceed with MDS on Tuesday and care planning meetings on Thursday. Nursing home resident care coordinator to coordinate time with hospice patient care coordinator. 5. Hospice social worker to complete MDS form and patient care coordinator to bring to MDS meeting. B. NEW PATIENT TO HOSPICE (NURSING HOME RESIDENT) 1. Hospice-assessing RN to review nursing home plan of care; make changes on nursing home plan of care and bring copy back to hospice. A-95 2. Proceed with MDS on Tuesday and care planning meetings on Thursday. Nursing home resident care coordinator to coordinate time with hospice patient. 3. Hospice social worker to coordinate MDS with nursing home social worker and patient care coordinator to bring to MDS meeting. C. NEW PATIENT ONLY TO NURSING HOME (CURRENT HOSPICE PATIENT) 1. Hospice to provide a copy of plan of care and assessments. 2. Nursing home to use hospice plan of care. 3. Hospice social worker to do MDS form and patient care coordinator to bring to MDS meeting. 4. Proceed with MDS on Tuesday and care planning meetings on Thursday. Nursing home resident care coordinator to coordinate time with hospice patient care coordinator. II. MDS AND CARE PLAN MEETING A. MDS to be done on Tuesday - hospice RN and patient care coordinator; nursing home resident care coordinator and RN to attend. B. Hospice social worker will contribute to MDS meeting with written form. C. Care planning meeting will be on Thursday. Family, hospice SW, RN, patient care coordinator and nursing home RN, SW and resident care coordinator will attend. D. NH - SW to invite family to meeting. E. NH - RCC to contact hospice patient care coordinator to coordinate time for meeting. F. MDS and care planning meetings will be done every three months. III. PLAN OF CARE A. Changes will be made on plan of care to reflect appropriate hospice care. B. Changes will be entered into computerized plan of care and one plan of care will be filed into both charts. A-96 IV. IDG MEETINGS (INTERDISCIPLINARY GROUP) A. Nursing home will attend IDG meetings at hospice offices approximately one month after the care planning at nursing home. B. Patient care coordinator to coordinate and inform nursing home for attendance. C. Plans of care which are updated every two weeks at IDG meetings will be Xeroxed and brought to nursing home. D. All telephone calls to patient and families will be documented and copies provided to nursing home. * Example reproduced with permission of Grancare Nursing Center of Green Bay. A-97 SECTION V. GUIDELINES FOR INSERVICE/EDUCATION PLANNING Clear communication of the basic components of the contract, the policies and protocols that guide care coordination, and the key regulations that govern both providers is essential for a successful nursing home/hospice partnership. Achieving quality outcomes for patients and their families should be the focus of all staff efforts. Assuring effective participation by all levels of staff requires careful planning of the initial orientation following the establishment of a contract, as well as ongoing educational efforts aimed at improving efficiencies and understanding of experienced and new staff. Suggested content for these educational efforts are separated into "Initial Orientation" and "Ongoing Education." Initial Orientation Introducing the hospice concept to nursing home staff may be most effectively accomplished by using an interdisciplinary approach. Representation from each of the core disciplines is ideal to establish trusting relationships and encourage professional interaction. Recommendations for inclusion in the initial orientation process are listed below. *Note: It may be useful to group the topic areas according to individual roles of Nursing Home staff (i.e., meeting with business office and clerical staff separately from direct patient care staff to allow for questions and discussion specific to the expertise of the group.) • Discussion of hospice concept and philosophy, including reference to patient's entitlement. • Informed consent and corresponding expectations/accountabilities. • Services available - delineation of benefits. • Introduction of core team members/roles. • Terminology - definition of terms as specified in the contract. • How/when to notify hospice. • On call availability • Discussion of mutual roles and responsibilities as outlined in the contract A-98 • Communication and collaboration relating to care planning, ongoing patient needs, family support, record maintenance. • Symptom management practices common for hospice patients. • Securing and processing of physician orders (including utilization of standing orders, if applicable). • Reimbursement scenarios. • Bereavement services available. • Location of resource materials such as a hospice manual with accompanying quick references. • DME, disposable supplies, oxygen, and ancillary services to be supplied by the hospice. • Provision of pharmacy services. Clarifying the role of the hospice team in the nursing home needs to be balanced by a corresponding effort to educate hospice staff on the regulations and protocols of the nursing home. Information to be included in this effort might include the following: • Tour of the facility, with introductions of key personnel, location of records, security system operation, and any information specific to the physical layout and daily routine. • Discussion of Resident Rights. • Life Safety Code, including fire/emergency procedures, exits, etc. • Key terminology - definition of terms, including terms specified in the contract. • Comprehensive assessment process and requirements. • Care planning process, including conferences, family involvement, etc. • Record keeping practices. • Infection control issues, especially including biohazard waste disposal, location of PPE and blood spill clean-up kit, etc. • Chemical/Physical restraints. A-99 • Medication management, including regulations governing use of psychotropics, "unnecessary medications", self-medication, etc. • Patient levels of care and reimbursement scenarios. • Pertinent facility policies (i.e., CPR, hydration, RN coverage, including any policies that explore ethical issues). Ongoing Education: Many hospices provide periodic updates for their contracted nursing homes to review practical issues related to mutual roles and responsibilities. This provides an opportunity for dialogue, problem solving, feedback, and recognition of the cooperative relationships and the impact this collaboration has on quality care for patients. Suggested topics to include in these periodic updates: • Inservices on pain control and other symptom management protocols commonly used for hospice patients. • Inservices on loss, grief and bereavement care. • Quality assurance/improvement study results and recommendations. • Practical issues related to communication with physicians, management of orders, etc. • Care plan coordination process. • Volunteer involvement and utilization. • Review and discuss mutual roles and responsibilities as appropriate. Some hospices hold regular conferences in the nursing home on a prearranged schedule (weekly to monthly) to communicate on patient related issues. Others conduct occasional IDG meetings in the nursing home and encourage nursing home staff participation. These suggestions, as well as the guidelines for initial orientation, are not intended to be all-inclusive. Creative approaches that foster improved understanding and communication between the nursing home and hospice providers are encouraged. The use of various "mediums" is helpful to have available in the nursing home for staff who are unable to attend scheduled inservices. These might include audio/video tapes, selflearning modules, quick reference materials, and a manual containing pertinent hospice protocols/policies. A-100 SECTION VI. CONCLUSION AND ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS The Wisconsin Health Care Association, Wisconsin Association of Homes and Services for the Aging, and the Hospice Organization of Wisconsin have undertaken this statewide joint venture for the purpose of protecting access to quality hospice care for eligible nursing home residents. Through the combined efforts of the initial task force and the associated work groups, the intended outcome has been to develop guidelines and protocols for nursing homes and hospices that are: − flexible enough to meet individual patient needs; − predictable enough to ensure quality of care; and − consistent with the requirements that govern patient care as set forth in HSS 131, HSS 132, and federal regulations for hospices and nursing homes. The measure of success for this collective effort is the question of access. It is hoped that access to hospice care for nursing home residents may be protected and expanded through diligent efforts to maintain clear communication while striving to meet the unique needs of patients and their families. WHCA, WAHSA, and HOW gratefully acknowledge the contributions of the numerous individuals who have participated in this process and the support of their organizations. The shared commitment of the statewide nursing home and hospice industries has set the tone for continued success in this collaborative process. A-101 APPENDIX E. ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LIST Hospice of Metro Denver Denver, CO San Diego Hospice San Diego, CA Hospice of North Central Florida Gainesville, FL Hospice Association of Western NY Cheektowaga, NY VITAS Healthcare Corporation Miami, FL Hospice of the Florida Suncoast Largo, FL Parker Jewish Institute for Health Care and Rehabilitation New Hyde Park, NY Frankfort Community Care Home Kansas VISTA Southfield, MI Hospice of Palm Beach County West Palm Bech, FL Hospice of the North Shore Evanston, IL Hospice of the Grand Valley Grand Function, CO Hospice of the Blue Grass Lexington, KY Cabrini Center for Nursing and Rehabilitation New York, NY Jennings Hall Garfield Heights, OH Laguna Honda Hospital and Rehabilitation San Francisco, CA Terence Cardinal Cooke Health Center New York, NY Menorah Park Center for Aging Cleveland, OH Jewish Home for the Aged San Francisco, CA South Dakota Department of Health Pierre, SD Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment Denver, CO National Hospice Organization Washington, DC American Association of Homes and Services for the Aging Washington, DC Robert Wood Johnson Foundation Princeton, NJ Wisconsin Department of Health and Family Services Madison, WI Clara Baldwin Stocker Home and Convalescent Hospital West Covina, CA Bethany Medical Center Kansas City, KS Catholic Care Center Wichita, KS Montefiore Home Beachwood, OH Oklahoma State Department of Health Oklahoma City, OK Agency for Health Care Health Facilities Compliance Tallahassee, FL Genesis ElderCare Rehabilitation Tampa, FL Hospice Association of America Washington, DC American Health Care Association Washington, DC HCFA/Center for Medicaid and State Operations Baltimore, MD New Jersey Department of Health and Senior Services Trenton, NJ A-102 To obtain a printed copy of this report, send the full report title and your mailing information to: U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Office of Disability, Aging and Long-Term Care Policy Room 424E, H.H. Humphrey Building 200 Independence Avenue, S.W. Washington, D.C. 20201 FAX: 202-401-7733 Email: [email protected] RETURN TO: Office of Disability, Aging and Long-Term Care Policy (DALTCP) Home [http://aspe.hhs.gov/_/office_specific/daltcp.cfm] Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) Home [http://aspe.hhs.gov] U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Home [http://www.hhs.gov] SYNTHESIS AND ANALYSIS OF MEDICARE HOSPICE BENEFITS Reports Available The goal of ASPE's Medicare Hospice Benefit study was to provide general information on the role of the Medicare hospice benefit and more specific information about how end of life care is provided to institutionalized beneficiaries. Six reports wereproduced from this study: Synthesis and Analysis of Medicare’s Hospice Benefit: Executive Summary and Recommendations (report 1) briefly summarizes the methods used for each report and the findings and recommendations that emerged from each of the following reports under this study. HTML http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/samhbes.htm PDF http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/samhbes.pdf Important Questions for Hospice in the Next Century (report 2) synthesizes the literature related to the Medicare hospice benefit and summarizes discussions with key informants on the use of hospice in nursing homes. Executive Summary http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/impquees.htm HTML http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/impques.htm PDF http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/impques.pdf Medicare’s Hospice Benefit: Use and Expenditures, 1996 Cohort (report 3) analyzes Medicare utilization and payments for hospice users in 1996. HTML http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/96useexp.htm PDF http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/96useexp.pdf Use of Medicare’s Hospice Benefit by Nursing Facility Residents (report 4) examines differences in hospice utilization and expenditures as a function of when nursing facility residents started using hospice services (i.e., before or during a nursing home stay). HTML http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/nufares.htm PDF http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/nufares.pdf Outcomes and Utilization for Hospice and Non-Hospice Nursing Facility Decedents (report 5) compares pain management and types of services provided to dying nursing home residents receiving hospice compared to other dying residents who did not receive hospice. HTML http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/oututil.htm PDF http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/oututil.pdf Hospice Benefits and Utilization in the Large Employer Market (report 6) reports on how hospice services are provided by 52 large employers and used by their employees, and identifies alternative approaches to designing and administering hospice benefits. Executive Summary http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/empmktes.htm HTML http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/empmkt.htm PDF http://aspe.hhs.gov/daltcp/reports/empmkt.pdf
© Copyright 2024