A National Study of End-of-Life Care among Older Veterans with Hearing and Vision Loss

Prevalence of dual sensory impairment in veterans: a rapid systematic review

Dual sensory impairment (DSI) is prevalent in the older population, but due to exposure to military-related risk factors, it is a particular problem for veterans, older and younger. This rapid review aimed to critically review and summarise the prevalence of DSI in military veteran populations, as well as any associative factors and outcomes that were assessed. This was done in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews (PRISMA) statement. Several databases (Scopus, Web of Science, AMED, CINAHL Plus, Ultimate, and MEDLINE via EBSCOHost) were searched and five studies were selected for final review. All studies provided a prevalence rate for DSI in a veteran sample. One study also looked at functional independence as an outcome. Three of the studies considered blast injuries and traumatic brain injury (TBI) by using samples from TBI patient populations. Overall, results of this review suggest that age and presence of TBI and/or exposure to blast may increase prevalence of DSI in veterans. Prevalence rates ranged from 5.0-34.6% but there are caveats. There is a lack of universal or standardised definition for DSI, making it difficult to determine true prevalence. Future research should also include veterans who may not be receiving support from Veterans Affairs, consider factors such as TBI aetiology and severity based on clinical measures, and utilise a more standardised definition for DSI based on clinical measures.

Validation of Electronic Health Record-Based Algorithms to Identify Specialist Palliative Care Within the Department of Veterans Affairs

BACKGROUND

The measurement of specialist palliative care (SPC) across Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) facilities relies on algorithms applied to administrative databases. However, the validity of these algorithms has not been systematically assessed.

MEASURES

In a cohort of people with heart failure identified by ICD 9/10 codes, we validated the performance of algorithms to identify SPC consultation in administrative data and differentiate outpatient from inpatient encounters.

INTERVENTION

We derived separate samples of people by receipt of SPC using combinations of stop codes signifying specific clinics, current procedural terminology (CPT), a variable representing encounter location, and ICD-9/ICD-10 codes for SPC. We calculated sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values (PPV, NPV) for each algorithm using chart review as the reference standard.

OUTCOMES

Among 200 people who did and did not receive SPC (mean age = 73.9 years (standard deviation [SD] = 11.5), 98% male, 73% White), the validity of the stop code plus CPT algorithm to identify any SPC consultation was: Sensitivity = 0.89 (95% Confidence Interval [CI] 0.82-0.94), Specificity = 1.0 [0.96-1.0], PPV = 1.0 [0.96-1.0], NPV = 0.93 [0.86-0.97]. The addition of ICD codes increased sensitivity but decreased specificity. Among 200 people who received SPC (mean age = 74.2 years [SD = 11.8], 99% male, 71% White), algorithm performance in differentiating outpatient from inpatient encounters was: Sensitivity = 0.95 (0.88-0.99), Specificity = 0.81 (0.72-0.87), PPV = 0.38 (0.29-0.49), and NPV = 0.99 (0.95-1.0). Adding encounter location improved the sensitivity and specificity of this algorithm.

CONCLUSIONS

VA algorithms are highly sensitive and specific in identifying SPC and in differentiating outpatient from inpatient encounters. These algorithms can be used with confidence to measure SPC in quality improvement and research across the VA.

Assessment of Sensory Impairment and Health Care Satisfaction Among Medicare Beneficiaries

IMPORTANCE

Satisfaction with care is associated with improved quality of care and health outcomes. Sensory impairment can be a barrier to effective communication and access to care, and this may result in reduced satisfaction with care.

OBJECTIVE

This study examined the association between sensory impairment and health care satisfaction among Medicare beneficiaries.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study used data from the 2017 Medicare Current Beneficiary Survey (MCBS), a nationally representative in-person survey of Medicare beneficiaries. Functional sensory impairment was categorized as no sensory impairment, hearing impairment, vision impairment, and dual sensory impairment. Patient dissatisfaction included responses on quality of care, ease to get to a doctor, out-of-pocket costs paid, information given, and doctors' concern with overall health rather than an isolated symptom or disease.

EXPOSURES

Self-reported functional sensory impairment.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Multivariable-adjusted odds ratios (ORs) of the association between dissatisfaction with care and sensory impairment.

RESULTS

A total of 10 783 respondents representing 44 736 889 Medicare beneficiaries (8944 [85.3%] aged ≥65 years, 5733 [52.9%] women, and 8195 [75.5%] non-Hispanic White) were included. Dual sensory impairment compared with no sensory impairment was associated with the highest odds of dissatisfaction across outcomes, including quality of care (OR, 1.52; 95% CI, 1.12-2.08). Compared with no sensory impairment, having dual sensory impairment (OR, 1.82; 95% CI, 1.40-2.37), hearing impairment (OR, 1.67; 95% CI, 1.29-2.17), or vision impairment (OR, 1.56; 95% CI, 1.18-2.08) were associated with dissatisfaction with the information provided about what was wrong. Those with hearing impairment (OR, 1.38; 95% CI, 1.03-1.86) or dual sensory impairment (OR, 2.03; 95% CI, 1.55-2.66) were more likely to be dissatisfied with doctors' concern with overall health compared with those with no sensory impairment. Having dual sensory impairment or vision impairment only was associated with greater odds of dissatisfaction with ease to get to a doctor (dual sensory: OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.24-2.30; vision: OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.14-2.31) and out-of-pocket costs paid (dual sensory: OR, 1.27; 95% CI, 1.04-1.54; vision: OR, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.07-1.61).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

These findings contribute to the growing body of literature on sensory impairment and patient satisfaction and have implications for health care system planning and spending to provide patient-centered care for older adults.