Get help now — free helplines

You can call any of these for free. You do not need a diagnosis, an appointment, or a crisis to call — questions and plain exhaustion are reasons enough.

  • Alzheimer's Association 24/7 Helpline 800-272-3900 24 hours a day, 365 days a year Free, confidential support and information for people with dementia, caregivers, families and the public. Master's-level clinicians. Also Spanish.
  • 988 Suicide & Crisis Lifeline 988 24/7 Call or text 988, or chat at 988lifeline.org. For anyone in emotional distress or a mental-health crisis, including caregivers.
  • Alzheimer's Foundation of America (AFA) Helpline 866-232-8484 9:00 am - 9:00 pm ET, seven days a week Licensed social workers providing support, info and referrals. Also text message and web chat. Text: 646-586-5283

In a medical emergency, call 911. More numbers, and what each line does, on the help page.

This page is alzhub.org's plain-English summary of a published study, not the paper itself. It is generated from the record we hold for this study, sourced and linked below — check the original for the full text and methods.

✓ Peer-reviewed alzhub usefulness score 67 out of 100. End-of-life care

Topic: Risk, prevention and care in population studies

Background Hospice providers contend that enrollment reduces the cost of the Medicare programs, but estimates of effects are dated, methodologically limited, and focused on persons with cancer. Objective To estimate the effects of hospice care on Medicare program payments during the last year of life from 1996 to 1999 within cohorts defined by age and diagnosis. Design Retrospective cohort. Setting Deceased Medicare enrollees. Participants Elderly Medicare fee-for-service beneficiaries who received 36 months of continuous Part A and B coverage before death during 1996 to 1999 (n = 245 326). Age- and condition-specific (cancer or noncancer and principal condition) cohorts were defined. Measurements Medicare expenditures in the last year of life, as a total figure and by service type. The cost effects of hospice were estimated by using linear regression within the cohorts for hospice enrollees compared with nonenrollees after adjustment for propensity to use hospice, gender, race, enrollment in Medicaid, urban setting, duration of illness, comorbid conditions, low use of Medicare, nursing home residence, and year of death. Results Adjusted mean expenditures were 4.0% higher overall among hospice enrollees than among nonenrollees. Adjusted mean expenditures were 1% lower for hospice enrollees with cancer than for patients with cancer who did not use hospice. Savings were highest (7% to 17%) among enrollees with lung cancer and other very aggressive types of cancer diagnosed in the last year of life. Expenditures for hospice enrollees without cancer were 11% higher than for nonenrollees, ranging from 20% to 44% for patients with dementia and 0% to 16% for those with chronic heart failure or failure of most other organ systems. Hospice-related savings decreased and relative costs increased with age. Conclusion Hospice enrollment correlates with reduced Medicare expenditures among younger decedents with cancer but increased expenditures among decedents without cancer and those older than 84 years of age. Future studies should assess the effects of hospice on quality and on expenditures from all payment sources.

Key findings

Study details

How this study scored 67/100
How this study's score is builtJournal tier 9 of 10; Journal's citation record left out, no data; Study design 7 of 12; Strength of evidence 3 of 5; Peer-review validation 10 of 10; How recent 1 of 5; Sample size 2 of 4; Effect reported 2 of 3; Studied in people 3 of 3; Randomised / blinded 0 of 2; Times cited left out, no data; Citations per year left out, no data; Impact for its field and year left out, no data; Cited by studies here left out, no data; Still being cited left out, no data; Senior author's track record left out, no data; Institution's track record left out, no data; Multi-centre collaboration left out, no data; Indexed in PubMed 2 of 2; Free to read 0 of 2. 39 of the 58 points it could be judged on, which is 67 of 100. Total 67 of 100.39 of the 58 points we could judge = 67 of 100

Published in a leading specialty journal, and it is a retrospective cohort study, reconstructed from past records. Scored zero for randomised / blinded because the record does not state it. We have no data on journal's citation record, times cited, citations per year, impact for its field and year, cited by studies here, still being cited, senior author's track record, institution's track record and multi-centre collaboration, so those were left out: it earned 39 of the 58 points we could judge it on, which is 67 out of 100.

ComponentPointsWhy
Journal tier 9 / 10 Tier 2 — leading specialty journal (Annals of internal medicine)
Journal's citation record — / 4 No journal record from OpenAlex — left out of this score
Study design 7 / 12 A retrospective cohort study, reconstructed from past records
Strength of evidence 3 / 5 Rated “moderate” in our summary
Peer-review validation 10 / 10 Peer-reviewed. Published as an article in a named peer-reviewed journal.
How recent 1 / 5 2004 — older than 20 years, still counted
Sample size 2 / 4 245 participants
Effect reported 2 / 3 Effect reported as a number, without an interval or test
Studied in people 3 / 3 Studied in people (participant count stated)
Randomised / blinded 0 / 2 No randomisation or blinding stated — scores zero (not stated in the record — scored 0)
Times cited — / 7 No citation count (not found in OpenAlex) — left out of this score
Citations per year — / 5 No citation count or no year — left out of this score
Impact for its field and year — / 6 No field-weighted citation impact (OpenAlex has none yet) — left out of this score
Cited by studies here — / 6 Not yet checked against this library's citation graph — left out of this score
Still being cited — / 4 No yearly citation counts — left out of this score
Senior author's track record — / 4 Senior author's record not available — left out of this score
Institution's track record — / 3 No institution listed in OpenAlex — left out of this score
Multi-centre collaboration — / 3 Institutions not listed — left out of this score
Indexed in PubMed 2 / 2 Indexed in PubMed (PMID 14970150)
Free to read 0 / 2 Behind a paywall — scores zero
Points 39 / 58 Scored on 11 of 20 parts. We have no data for the rest, so they are left out: 39 of the 58 points we could judge it on is 67 out of 100.
Total 67 / 100 —

What each of these 20 components measures, and what this score is not →

Read the original

Free copy unknown: no free-copy check has an answer for this record yet. That does not mean it is paywalled.

Cite this study APA, Vancouver, BibTeX · download .bib or .ris

Built from the record alzhub holds for this paper, not looked up. Volume, issue and page numbers are not held in the record. Check the citation against the original before you use it.

APA 7th

Campbell, D. E., Lynn, J., Louis, T. A., & Shugarman, L. R. (2004). Medicare program expenditures associated with hospice use. Annals of internal medicine. https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-140-4-200402170-00009

Vancouver

Campbell DE, Lynn J, Louis TA, Shugarman LR. Medicare program expenditures associated with hospice use. Annals of internal medicine. 2004. doi:10.7326/0003-4819-140-4-200402170-00009. PMID: 14970150.

BibTeX

@article{campbell2004-14970150,
  author  = {Campbell, D. E. and Lynn, J. and Louis, T. A. and Shugarman, L. R.},
  title   = {{Medicare program expenditures associated with hospice use}},
  journal = {Annals of internal medicine},
  year    = {2004},
  doi     = {10.7326/0003-4819-140-4-200402170-00009},
  pmid    = {14970150},
  url     = {https://doi.org/10.7326/0003-4819-140-4-200402170-00009}
}

Related studies in End-of-life care

Similar studies

More on End-of-life care

See all studies in End-of-life care →