Search

BackgroundTelephone and video telemedicine appointments have been a crucial service delivery method during the COVID-19 pandemic for maintaining access to health care without increasing the risk of exposure. Although studies conducted prior to the pandemic have suggested that telemedicine is an acceptable format for older adults, there is a paucity of data on the practical implementation of telemedicine visits. Due to prior lack of reimbursement for telemedicine visits involving nonrural patients, no studies have compared telephone visits to video visits in geriatric primary care. ObjectiveThis study aimed to determine (1) whether video visits had longer durations, more visit diagnoses, and more advance care planning discussions than telephone visits during the rapid implementation of telemedicine in the COVID-19 pandemic, and (2) whether disparities in visit type existed based on patient characteristics. MethodsWe conducted a retrospective, cross-sectional analysis of patients seen at two geriatric clinics from April 23 to May 22, 2020. Approximately 25% of patients who had telephone and video appointments during this time underwent chart review. We analyzed patient characteristics, visit characteristics, duration of visits, number of visit diagnoses, and the presence of advance care planning discussion in clinical documentation. ResultsOf the 190 appointments reviewed, 47.4% (n=90) were video visits. Compared to telephone appointments, videoconferencing was, on average, 7 minutes longer (mean 37.3 minutes, SD 10 minutes; P

BackgroundAdvance care planning is the process of discussing health care treatment preferences based on patients’ personal values, and it often involves the completion of advance directives. In the first months of 2020, a novel coronavirus, severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), began circulating widely in the American state of Colorado, leading to widespread diagnosis of coronavirus disease (COVID-19), hospitalizations, and deaths. In this context, the importance of technology-based, non–face-to-face methods to conduct advance care planning via patient portals has increased. ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to determine the rates of use of a web-based advance care planning tool through a health system–based electronic patient portal both before and in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic. MethodsIn 2017, we implemented web-based tools through the patient portal of UCHealth’s electronic health record (EHR) for patients to learn about advance care planning and complete an electronically signed medical durable power of attorney (MDPOA) to legally appoint a medical decision maker. Patients accessing the portal can complete and submit a legally valid MDPOA, which becomes part of their medical record. We collected data on the patients’ date of MDPOA completion, use of advance care planning messaging, age, sex, and geographic location during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic (December 29, 2019, to May 30, 2020). ResultsOver a 5-month period that includes the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic in Colorado, total monthly use of the advance care planning portal tool increased from 418 users in January to 1037 users in April and then decreased slightly to 815 users in May. The number of MDPOA forms submitted per week increased 2.4-fold after the stay-at-home order was issued in Colorado on March 26, 2020 (P

The United States is facing a social isolation and loneliness crisis. In response, the US Surgeon General issued an advisory in May 2023 recommending actions that health care, community programs, and social services can take to collaboratively improve social connection. Primary care has a critical role to play in implementing the Surgeon General's recommendations. We present social isolation and loneliness as medical issues and highlight next steps for the primary care sector to combat this epidemic. https://doi.org/10.1370/afm.3102, Annals Early Access article INTRODUCTION The Social Isolation and Loneliness Epidemic Social isolation and loneliness have gained significant attention in recent years and are increasingly recognized as urgent health issues [...]

BackgroundGroup visits can support health behavior change and self-efficacy. In primary care, an advance care planning (ACP) group visit may leverage group dynamics and peer mentorship to facilitate education and personal goal setting that result in ACP engagement.ObjectiveTo determine whether the ENgaging in Advance Care Planning Talks (ENACT) group visits intervention improves ACP documentation and readiness in older adults.MethodsThis randomized clinical trial was conducted among geriatric primary care patients from the University of Colorado Hospital Seniors Clinic, Aurora, CO, from August 2017 to November 2019. Participants randomized to ENACT group visits (n = 55) participated in two 2-hour sessions with discussions of ACP topics and use of ACP tools (i.e., Conversation Starter Kit, Medical Durable Power of Attorney form, and PREPARE videos). Participants randomized to the control arm (n = 55) received the Conversation Starter Kit and a Medical Durable Power of Attorney form by mail. The primary outcomes included presence of ACP documents or medical decision-maker documentation in the electronic health record (EHR) at 6 months, and a secondary outcome was ACP readiness (validated four-item ACP Engagement Survey) at 6 months.ResultsParticipants were a mean of 77 years old, 60% female, and 79% white. At 6 months, 71% of ENACT participants had an advance directive in the EHR (26% higher) compared with 45% of control arm participants (P

Background: The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated the transition from in person to virtual advance care planning (ACP) engagement efforts. This pilot initiative evaluated virtual group visits (GVs) and in-person GVs for ACP to determine their feasibility and effectiveness. Methods: Participants included patients in a Geriatric Medicine clinic who were referred by their primary care physician to an ACP GVs intervention. The ACP GVs had 2 sessions, led by clinicians with ACP expertise who facilitated a discussion on patients' values, goals, and preferences. Participants were provided with technical assistance to support use of the virtual platform. Evaluation included an ACP readiness survey, post-session feedback, GV observations, and electronic health record review at baseline and a 6 month follow-up for goals of care documentation and advance directives. Results: Seventy patients attended 46 ACP GVs from August 2019 to February 2022, including 16 in-person GVs and 54 virtual GVs. At a 6 month follow-up, for virtual GVs participants (n = 54), goals of care documentation increased from 31% to 93%, and advance directives increased from 22% to 30%. For in-person GVs participants (n = 16), goals of care documentation increased from 25% to 100%, and advance directives increased from 69% to 75%. All surveyed patients in both formats would recommend ACP GVs. Conclusion: ACP GVs are feasible and effective for supporting ACP, demonstrating an increase in both goals of care conversations and advance directives completion. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Hearing loss is prevalent and consequential but under‐diagnosed and managed. The Medicare Annual Wellness Visit (AWV) health risk assessment elicits patient‐reported hearing concerns but whether such information affects documentation, diagnosis, or referral is unknown. Methods: We use 5 years of electronic medical record (EMR) data (2017–2022) for a sample of 13,776 older primary care patients. We identify the first (index) AWV indication of hearing concerns and existing and subsequent hearing loss EMR diagnoses (visit diagnoses or problem list diagnoses) and audiology referrals. For a 20% random sample of AWV notes (n = 474) we compared hearing loss EMR diagnoses to documentation of (1) hearing concerns, (2) hearing loss/aid use, and (3) referrals for hearing care. Results: Of 3845 (27.9%) older adults who identified hearing concerns (mean age 79.1 years, 57% female, 75% white) 24% had an existing hearing diagnosis recorded. Among 474 patients with AWV clinical notes reviewed, 90 (19%) had an existing hearing loss diagnosis. Clinicians were more likely to document hearing concerns or hearing loss/aid use for those with (vs. without) an existing EMR diagnosis (50.6% vs. 35.9%, p = 0.01; 68.9% vs. 37.5%, p < 0.001, respectively). EMR diagnoses of hearing loss were recorded for no more than 40% of those with indicated hearing concerns. Among those without prior diagnosis 38 (9.9%) received a hearing care referral within 1 month. Subgroup analysis suggest greater likelihood of documenting hearing concerns for patients age 80+ (OR:1.51, 95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.03, 2.19) and decreased likelihood of documenting known hearing loss among patients with more chronic conditions (OR: 0.49, 95% CI: 0.27, 0.9), with no differences observed by race. Conclusion: Documentation of hearing loss in EMR and AWV clinical notes is limited among older adults with subjective hearing concerns. Systematic support and incorporation of hearing into EMR and clinical notes may increase hearing loss visibility by care teams. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Home health aides (HHAs) care for patients highly vulnerable to COVID-19 and are disproportionately women from minority communities that have been adversely impacted by COVID-19. Yet, direct care workers are less likely to be vaccinated against COVID-19 compared to others. As the pandemic evolves, interest in vaccination may decrease suggesting the need for relevant vaccine messaging to HHAs. Objectives: (1) to describe HHAs and administrators' perspectives related to COVID-19 vaccination messaging, and (2) to co-design a Communication Toolkit to create COVID-19 vaccine messages. Methods: HHAs and administrators from 4 geographically diverse Palliative Care Research Cooperative (PCRC) hospice agencies were recruited for a multi-method process involving qualitative interviews (17 HHAs and 5 administrators), community engagement (CE) studios, and development of a Communication Toolkit. Interviews were guided by the PEN-3 conceptual framework to explore barriers and facilitators to vaccination. Data were analyzed using qualitative content analysis. Results: Despite power differences, HHAs and administrators share a commitment to protecting patients affected by serious illness. HHAs desire vaccine messaging that includes personal narratives, good news about the vaccine, and facts about benefits and risks of the vaccine. Preferred message formats include the agency intranet, daily briefings, or "little seeds" (ie, short, high-impact information). Through the studios, HHAs provided input on a Toolkit prototype with messages tailored to the context of home care. Conclusions: Grounded in the commitment of HHAs and administrators to protecting vulnerable patients, we co-created an adaptable Communication Toolkit to address COVID-19 vaccination misinformation and mistrust among direct care workers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

ContextAdvance care planning (ACP) engagement includes a wide range of behaviors and actions related to discussions and documentation, yet few ACP intervention studies measure the full process.ObjectivesThe objective of the study was to compare the effects of an easy-to-read advance directive (AD) versus an ACP web site plus the AD (PREPARE + AD) on Behavior Change Processes and Actions, including discussions and documentation.MethodsSecondary data were from a completed ACP trial. Participants were primary care patients, ≥60 years old, with two comorbidities. We used the validated ACP Engagement Survey to examine six-month change in subscales measuring Behavior Change Processes (knowledge, contemplation, self-efficacy, readiness) and Actions (decision makers, quality of life, flexibility for decision makers, asking clinicians questions), specifically related to discussions and documentation. We used adjusted mixed-effects linear models to compare mean change and engagement over time.ResultsCompared to the AD-only, PREPARE + AD resulted in greater increases in all Behavior Change Processes subscales and Actions related to decision makers, quality of life, and flexibility (all P-values ≤0.005). Both interventions significantly increased the proportion of participants who engaged in ACP discussions (PREPARE + AD, 99.5%; AD-only, 93.3%) and documentation (PREPARE + AD, 99.5%; AD-only, 90.4%), with greater increases for PREPARE + AD (all P-values

BackgroundPrimary care providers in safety-net settings often do not have time to discuss advance care planning (ACP). Group visits (GV) may be an efficient means to provide ACP education.ObjectivesTo assess the feasibility and impact of a video-based website to facilitate GVs to engage diverse adults in ACP.DesignFeasibility pilot among patients who were ≥55 years of age from two primary care clinics in a Northern California safety-net setting. Participants attended two 90-minute GVs and viewed the five steps of the movie version of the PREPARE website ( www.prepareforyourcare.org ) concerning surrogates, values, and discussing wishes in video format. Two clinician facilitators were available to encourage participation.MeasurementsWe assessed pre-to-post ACP knowledge, whether participants designated a surrogate or completed an advance directive (AD), and acceptability of GVs and PREPARE materials.ResultsWe conducted two GVs with 22 participants. Mean age was 64 years (±7), 55% were women, 73% nonwhite, and 55% had limited literacy. Knowledge improved about surrogate designation (46% correct pre vs. 85% post, p = 0.01) and discussing decisions with others (59% vs. 90%, p = 0.01). Surrogate designation increased (48% vs. 85%, p = 0.01) and there was a trend toward AD completion (9% vs. 24%, p = 0.21). Participants rated the GVs and PREPARE materials a mean of 8 (±3.1) on a 10-point acceptability scale.ConclusionsUsing the PREPARE movie to facilitate ACP GVs for diverse adults in safety net, primary care settings is feasible and shows potential for increasing ACP engagement.

ContextStandardized outcomes that define successful advance care planning (ACP) are lacking.ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to create an Organizing Framework of ACP outcome constructs and rate the importance of these outcomes.MethodsThis study convened a Delphi panel consisting of 52 multidisciplinary, international ACP experts including clinicians, researchers, and policy leaders from four countries. We conducted literature reviews and solicited attendee input from five international ACP conferences to identify initial ACP outcome constructs. In five Delphi rounds, we asked panelists to rate patient-centered outcomes on a seven-point "not-at-all" to "extremely important" scale. We calculated means and analyzed panelists' input to finalize an Organizing Framework and outcome rankings.ResultsOrganizing Framework outcome domains included process (e.g., attitudes), actions (e.g., discussions), quality of care (e.g., satisfaction), and health care (e.g., utilization). The top five outcomes included 1) care consistent with goals, mean 6.71 (±SD 0.04); 2) surrogate designation, 6.55 (0.45); 3) surrogate documentation, 6.50 (0.11); 4) discussions with surrogates, 6.40 (0.19); and 5) documents and recorded wishes are accessible when needed 6.27 (0.11). Advance directive documentation was ranked 10th, 6.01 (0.21). Panelists raised caution about whether "care consistent with goals" can be reliably measured.ConclusionA large, multidisciplinary Delphi panel developed an Organizing Framework and rated the importance of ACP outcome constructs. Top rated outcomes should be used to evaluate the success of ACP initiatives. More research is needed to create reliable and valid measurement tools for the highest rated outcomes, particularly "care consistent with goals."

BackgroundInterprofessional health care team members consider advance care planning (ACP) to be important, yet gaps remain in systematic clinical routines to support ACP. A clearer understanding of the interprofessional team members' perspectives on ACP clinical routines in diverse settings is needed.MethodsOne hundred eighteen health care team members from community-based clinics, long-term care facilities, academic clinics, federally qualified health centers, and hospitals participated in a 35-question, cross-sectional online survey to assess clinical routines, workflow processes, and policies relating to ACP.ResultsRespondents were 53% physicians, 18% advanced practice nurses, 11% nurses, and 18% other interprofessional team members including administrators, chaplains, social workers, and others. Regarding clinical routines, respondents reported that several interprofessional team members play a role in facilitating ACP (ie, physician, social worker, nurse, others). Most (62%) settings did not have, or did not know of, policies related to ACP documentation. Only 14% of settings had a patient education program. Two-thirds of the respondents said that addressing ACP is a high priority and 85% felt that nonphysicians could have ACP conversations with appropriate training. The clinical resources needed to improve clinical routines included training for providers and staff, dedicated staff to facilitate ACP, and availability of patient/family educational materials.ConclusionAlthough interprofessional health care team members consider ACP a priority and several team members may be involved, clinical settings lack systematic clinical routines to support ACP. Patient educational materials, interprofessional team training, and policies to support ACP clinical workflows that do not rely solely on physicians could improve ACP across diverse clinical settings.

IntroductionGroup visits for advance care planning (ACP) may help patients document preferences for decision makers and future care. We assessed the impact of a primary care-based ACP group visit (ACP-GV) intervention on older adults' ACP documentation and why patients participated.MethodsOlder adults (>65 years) in primary care participated in a 2-session ACP-GV intervention that promotes group dynamics, peer-based learning, and goal setting. Charts were reviewed at baseline, 3 months, and 12 months for documentation of decision makers and ACP forms. We described patients' reasons for participating through analysis of transcripts.Results118 patients (mean age 76 years; 62% female and 82% white) participated in 16 ACP-GV cohorts. From baseline to 3-month follow-up, documentation of decision maker preferences increased from 39% to 81%, and was 89% at 12-month follow-up. Patients with completed ACP forms increased from 20% to 57% at 3 months, and was 67% at 12 months. Reasons for participating included recognizing the importance of ACP, curiosity, participation recommended by primary care provider, desire to talk with family/friends, and desire to complete advance directives.ConclusionsThis ACP-GV intervention increased ACP documentation among patients with diverse reasons for participating. This is a patient-centered approach to ACP in primary care.

ContextDespite increasing interest in advance care planning (ACP) and previous ACP descriptions, a consensus definition does not yet exist to guide clinical, research, and policy initiatives.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to develop a consensus definition of ACP for adults.MethodsWe convened a Delphi panel of multidisciplinary, international ACP experts consisting of 52 clinicians, researchers, and policy leaders from four countries and a patient/surrogate advisory committee. We conducted 10 rounds using a modified Delphi method and qualitatively analyzed panelists' input. Panelists identified several themes lacking consensus and iteratively discussed and developed a final consensus definition.ResultsPanelists identified several tensions concerning ACP concepts such as whether the definition should focus on conversations vs. written advance directives; patients' values vs. treatment preferences; current shared decision making vs. future medical decisions; and who should be included in the process. The panel achieved a final consensus one-sentence definition and accompanying goals statement: "Advance care planning is a process that supports adults at any age or stage of health in understanding and sharing their personal values, life goals, and preferences regarding future medical care. The goal of advance care planning is to help ensure that people receive medical care that is consistent with their values, goals and preferences during serious and chronic illness." The panel also described strategies to best support adults in ACP.ConclusionsA multidisciplinary Delphi panel developed a consensus definition for ACP for adults that can be used to inform implementation and measurement of ACP clinical, research, and policy initiatives.

Introduction: Consumer‐oriented health information technologies (CHIT) such as the patient portal have a growing role in care delivery redesign initiatives such as the Learning Health System. Care partners commonly navigate CHIT demands alongside persons with complex health and social needs, but their role is not well specified. Methods: We assemble evidence and concepts from the literature describing interpersonal communication, relational coordination theory, and systems‐thinking to develop an integrative framework describing the care partner's role in applied CHIT innovations. Our framework describes pathways through which systematic engagement of the care partner affects longitudinal work processes and multi‐level outcomes relevant to Learning Health Systems. Results: Our framework is grounded in relational coordination, an emerging theory for understanding the dynamics of coordinating work that emphasizes role‐based relationships and communication, and the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model. Cross‐cutting work systems geared toward explicit and purposeful support of the care partner role through CHIT may advance work processes by promoting frequent, timely, accurate, problem‐solving communication, reinforced by shared goals, shared knowledge, and mutual respect between patients, care partners, and care team. We further contend that systematic engagement of the care partner in longitudinal work processes exerts beneficial effects on care delivery experiences and efficiencies at both individual and organizational levels. We discuss the utility of our framework through the lens of an illustrative case study involving patient portal‐mediated pre‐visit agenda setting. Conclusions: Our framework can be used to guide applied embedded CHIT interventions that support the care partner role and bring value to Learning Health Systems through advancing digital health equity, improving user experiences, and driving efficiencies through improved coordination within complex work systems. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This article provides an approach to advance care planning (ACP) and goals of care communication in older adults with cardiovascular disease and multi-morbidity. The goal of ACP is to ensure that the medical care patients receive is aligned with their values and preferences. In this article, the authors outline common benefits and challenges to ACP for older adults with cardiovascular disease and multimorbidity. Recognizing that these patients experience diverse disease trajectories and receive care in multiple health care settings, the authors provide practical steps for multidisciplinary teams to integrate ACP into brief clinic encounters.

PurposePrimary care needs new models to facilitate advance care planning conversations. These conversations focus on preferences regarding serious illness and may involve patients, decision makers, and health care providers. We describe the feasibility of the first primary care-based group visit model focused on advance care planning.MethodsWe conducted a pilot demonstration of an advance care planning group visit in a geriatrics clinic. Patients were aged at least 65 years. Groups of patients met in 2 sessions of 2 hours each facilitated by a geriatrician and a social worker. Activities included considering personal values, discussing advance care planning, choosing surrogate decision-makers, and completing advance directives. We used the RE-AIM framework to evaluate the project.ResultsTen of 11 clinicians referred patients for participation. Of 80 patients approached, 32 participated in 5 group visit cohorts (a 40% participation rate) and 27 participated in both sessions (an 84% retention rate). Mean age was 79 years; 59% of participants were female and 72% white. Most evaluated the group visit as better than usual clinic visits for discussing advance care planning. Patients reported increases in detailed advance care planning conversations after participating (19% to 41%, P = .02). Qualitative analysis found that older adults were willing to share personal values and challenges related to advance care planning and that they initiated discussions about a broad range of relevant topics.ConclusionA group visit to facilitate discussions about advance care planning and increase patient engagement is feasible. This model warrants further evaluation for effectiveness in improving advance care planning outcomes for patients, clinicians, and the system.

The article presents a study which evaluated geriatric medicine fellowships' curricula related to hearing loss or audiology requirements, and performed a needs assessment of audiology education for geriatric medicine fellows. Topics include assessment of six clinical competency domains, hearing loss curricula on geriatric medicine program websites, and survey of geriatric medicine fellows' perspectives on hearing loss training.

Key components of advance care planning (ACP) for the elderly include choosing a surrogate decision maker, identifying personal values, communicating with surrogates and clinicians, documenting wishes in advance directives, and translating values and preferences for future medical care into medical orders. ACP often involves multiple brief discussions over time. This article outlines common benefits and barriers to ACP in primary care, and provides practical approaches to integrating key ACP components into primary care for older adults. Opportunities for multidisciplinary teams to incorporate ACP into brief clinic visits are highlighted.

The aim is to pilot a low-touch program for reducing benzodiazepine receptor agonist (BZRA; benzodiazepines, z-drugs) prescriptions among older veterans. Pilot randomized controlled trial consists of 2,009 veterans aged ≥ 65 years who received BZRA prescriptions from a Veterans Health Administration pharmacy (Colorado or Montana) during the prior 18 months. Active: Arm 1 was a mailed brochure about BZRA risks that also included information about a free, online cognitive behavioral therapy for the insomnia (CBTI) program. Arm 2 was a mailed brochure (same as arm 1) and telephone reinforcement call. Control: Arm 3 was a mailed brochure without insomnia treatment information. Active BZRA prescriptions at follow-up (6 and 12 months) were measured. In logistic regression analyses, the odds of BZRA prescription at 6- and 12-month follow-ups were not significantly different for arm 1 or 2 (active) versus arm 3 (control), including models adjusted for demographics and prescription characteristics (p-values >0.36). Although we observed no differences in active BZRA prescriptions, this pilot study provides guidance for conducting a future study, indicating a need for a more potent intervention. A full-scale trial testing an optimized program would provide conclusive results. Mailing information about BZRA risks and CBTI did not affect BZRA prescriptions. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: National POLST guidance indicates POLST is intended for individuals at risk of life‐threatening clinical events due to serious illness. Even though this patient population includes many, but not all, nursing facility residents, there is evidence that POLST is used broadly in this setting. This study aimed to identify clinician perspectives regarding factors that influence their decision‐making about whether to use POLST with nursing facility residents and to distinguish between inappropriate and appropriate use. Methods: We conducted a descriptive qualitative study to explore the experience of nursing facility clinicians using POLST with residents and deciding who is appropriate and inappropriate for POLST. Participants were purposively sampled from multiple states using POLST. Interviews were audio‐recorded and professionally transcribed. We used rapid qualitative analysis to code data and identify themes. Results: We interviewed 28 clinicians from 14 states about how they decided whether to use POLST with nursing facility residents and to distinguish between inappropriate and appropriate use. Four themes emerged as factors driving clinician‐decision‐making POLST use: (1) belief that "everyone is appropriate"; (2) resident and family preferences; (3) resident health status; and (4) policies requiring POLST [Correction added after first online publication on 07 Feb 2024. The word "For" has been changed to "Four" in the previous sentence.]. In most cases, participants cited resident and family preferences for treatment limitations as well as prognosis and clinical assessments in determining when POLST use was appropriate. Factors influencing potentially inappropriate POLST use included nursing facility policies requiring POLST completion that preempted clinical judgments of appropriateness. Conclusions: Findings highlight the disconnect between National POLST guidance and current use of POLST in nursing facilities. Policies requiring POLST use in nursing facilities and the belief that "everyone is appropriate" may impede clinician autonomy and lead to potentially inappropriate POLST use. Given varying approaches to POLST use in nursing facilities, there is a need to refocus attention on the intended population for POLST. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Early introduction of palliative care can improve patient-centered outcomes for older adults with complex medical conditions. However, identifying the need for and introducing palliative care with patients and caregivers is often difficult. We aim to identify how and why a multi-setting approach to palliative care discussions may improve the identification of palliative care needs and how to facilitate these conversations. Methods: Descriptive qualitative study to inform the development and future pilot testing of a model to improve recognition of, and support for, unmet palliative care needs in home health care (HHC). Thematic analysis of semi-structured interviews with providers across inpatient (n = 11), primary care (n = 17), and HHC settings (n = 10). Results: Four key themes emerged: 1) providers across settings can identify palliative care needs using their unique perspectives of the patient's care, 2) identifying palliative care needs is challenging due to infrequent communication and lack of shared information between providers, 3) importance of identifying a clinical lead of patient care who will direct palliative care discussions (primary care provider), and 4) importance of identifying a care coordination lead (HHC) to bridge communication among multi-setting providers. These themes highlight a multi-setting approach that would improve the frequency and quality of palliative care discussions. Conclusions: A lack of structured communication across settings is a major barrier to introducing and providing palliative care. A novel model that improves communication and coordination of palliative care across HHC, inpatient and primary care providers may facilitate identifying and addressing palliative care needs in medically complex older adults. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]