CONTEXT: The Bereaved Family Survey (BFS) is used to evaluate the quality of end-of-life (EOL) care in VA inpatient settings. The BFS consists of a global Performance Measure (BFS-PM) and three factors that relate to specific aspects of EOL care.
OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to identify empirically-based target scores on each BFS factor that are most strongly related to a rating of "excellent" on the BFS-PM.
METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional analysis of BFS and Veteran clinical data from January 2012 to January 2016. Logistic regression models were constructed for each potential cut-point on the three BFS factors and accounted for facility case-mix and nonresponse bias. Model fit was assessed primarily using the Liu Index, Bayesian Information Criterion (BIC) and classification accuracy values.
RESULTS: Our analytic sample included 40,180 Veterans whose next-of-kin completed a BFS. The mean BFS response rate across study years was 58%. A score of 14 or higher on the Respectful Care and Communication factor (range 0-15) had the lowest BIC (121355) and highest percent correctly classified (81.2%). The Emotional and Spiritual Support factor (range 0-9) had an optimal score of 8 or higher (BIC=133685; % correctly classified=77.1%). An optimal cut-point on the Benefits factor was not identified.
CONCLUSION: The identification of data-driven targets make BFS factor scores more useful to clinicians and administrators focused on improving quality of EOL care in their facilities. Our results lend support for prioritizing quality improvement efforts related to respectful care and communication.
PURPOSE: Several studies have identified differences in end-of-life (EOL) care between urban and rural areas, yet little is known about potential differences in care processes or family evaluations of care. The purpose of this study was to examine the relationship between rurality of residence and quality of EOL care within the Veterans Affairs health care system.
METHODS: This study was a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of 126,475 veterans who died from October 2009 through September 2016 in inpatient settings across 151 facilities. Using unadjusted and adjusted logistic regression, we compared quality of EOL care between urban and rural veterans using family evaluations of care and 4 quality of care indicators for receipt of (1) palliative care consult, (2) a chaplain visit, (3) death in an inpatient hospice unit, and (4) bereavement support.
FINDINGS: Veterans from rural areas had lower odds of dying in an inpatient hospice unit compared to veterans from urban areas, before and after adjustment (large rural OR 0.73, 95% CI: 0.70-0.77; P < .001, small rural OR 0.81, 95% CI: 0.77-0.86; P < .001, isolated rural OR 0.87, 95% CI: 0.81-0.93; P < .001). Differences in comparisons of other quality of care indicators were small and of mixed significance. No significant differences were found in family ratings of care in fully adjusted models.
CONCLUSION: Receipt of some EOL quality indicators differed with urban-rural residence for some comparisons. However, family ratings of care did not. Our findings call for further investigation into unmeasured individual characteristics and facility processes related to rurality.
Surveys of bereaved family members are increasingly being used to evaluate end-of-life (EOL) care and to measure organizational performance in EOL care quality. The Bereaved Family Survey (BFS) is used to monitor EOL care quality and benchmark performance in the Veterans Affairs (VA) health-care system. The objective of this study was to develop a case-mix adjustment model for the BFS and to examine changes in facility-level scores following adjustment, in order to provide fair comparisons across facilities. We conducted a cross-sectional secondary analysis of medical record and survey data from veterans and their family members across 146 VA medical centers. Following adjustment using model-based propensity weighting, the mean change in the BFS-Performance Measure score across facilities was -0.6 with a range of -2.6 to 0.6. Fifty-five (38%) facilities changed within ±0.5 percentage points of their unadjusted score. On average, facilities that benefited most from adjustment cared for patients with greater comorbidity burden and were located in urban areas in the Northwest and Midwestern regions of the country. Case-mix adjustment results in minor changes to facility-level BFS scores but allows for fairer comparisons of EOL care quality. Case-mix adjustment of the BFS positions this National Quality Forum-endorsed measure for use in public reporting and internal quality dashboards for VA leadership and may inform the development and refinement of case-mix adjustment models for other surveys of bereaved family members.