Abstract
Background:
Transitions to hospice are challenging for patients, caregivers, and health care teams, yet few studies have examined gaps in care from the perspectives of referring palliative care (PC) clinicians.
Objectives:
To identify facilitators and barriers in hospice transitions described by PC clinicians.
Design:
Qualitative study using semi-structured interviews focused on hospice transitions.
Setting/Subjects:
Ten referring PC clinicians (physicians, advanced practice providers, and a social worker) at a large academic health center.
Measurements:
Interviews were transcribed and analyzed using thematic content analysis.
Results:
Clinicians emphasized the value of hospice and the Medicare benefit, while identifying barriers to hospice transitions. Challenges included inadequate caregiving support, limited reimbursement, uncertainty around eligibility and prognostication, and differences between for-profit and non-profit hospice agencies. These barriers contributed to inequitable access to hospice and gaps in care.
Conclusions:
PC clinicians identify substantial barriers to hospice transitions, underscoring the need to improve access to comprehensive end-of-life care.
Key Message
According to palliative care clinicians, patients and families face significant barriers when transitioning to hospice care. Addressing barriers and strengthening facilitators is critical for allowing patients to access comprehensive care at end of life.
Introduction
Hospice use continues to increase in the United States with 1.8 million eligible beneficiaries in 2024. 1 Despite this growth, transitions to hospice remain challenging for patients, caregivers, and health care teams. Previous studies have explored gaps in care from patient and caregiver perspectives, identifying challenges around preparing the home, having in-home caregiving, accessing transportation, and understanding hospice services.2–5 Other work has explored health care worker perspectives, including hospice admissions staff and care coordinators, highlighting barriers such as low hospice literacy, medication changes, and inadequate handoffs.6,7 Additional studies have focused on provider perspectives, specifically discussing barriers to palliative care (PC) referral. 8
Few studies have directly examined transitions to hospice from the perspective of PC clinicians, who are uniquely positioned due to their training and frequent involvement in hospice referral and coordination. Prior research exploring perspectives of hospice experts were conducted in 1999. 9 More recent studies have included PC clinicians only as a small subset focused on long-term care facilities. 10 To address this gap, we conducted a qualitative study of PC clinicians within the Duke University Health System to explore facilitators and barriers to hospice transitions and identify opportunities to better support patients and families at the end of life.
Methods
Study design and recruitment
We conducted a qualitative study using semi-structured interviews. Twelve PC clinicians (physicians, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, and social workers) were identified through the Duke University Medical Center website and invited via e-mail. Ten clinicians consented and participated. The study was approved by the Duke University Health System Institutional Review Board.
Interviews
The interview guide included three sections: 1 description of a recent hospice transition, 2 description of a particularly challenging transition, and 3 general reflections on hospice, including the Medicare hospice benefit, the evolving hospice industry, end-of-life care at home, and underserved patient populations. Interviews were conducted over Zoom by a trained interviewer (M.M.N.) in private settings and continued until thematic saturation was reached.
Qualitative analysis
Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using NVivo 14. Two authors (M.M.N. and J.G.C.) individually reviewed transcripts for themes using a thematic content analysis approach. Themes were inductively developed and refined, and discrepancies resolved through discussion until consensus was reached.
Results
Ten PC clinicians participated and had a mean age of 47.5 ± 12.4. Most participants were physicians (70%), white (80%), female (60%), and non-Hispanic (100%) (Table 1). Four major domains emerged: barriers within hospice transitions, underserved patient populations, variability of for-profit and non-profit hospice agencies, and facilitators to hospice.
Demographic Data
With the exception of age, years worked in health care, and years practiced within palliative care.
Barriers to hospice
Clinicians identified four primary barriers: lack of caregiving support, where to provide hospice care, inadequate communication, and structural limitations of the Medicare Hospice Benefit (Table 2). All clinicians described caregiving support as a major limitation, since families are expected to provide extensive daily care. Uncertainty about whether hospice care could be safely delivered at home complicated transitions. Delays in communication between patients, primary teams, and hospice agencies can further prevent timely transitions. Structural barriers, including limited reimbursement and uncertainty about prognostication and eligibility, also contributed to delays in hospice services.
Barriers to Hospice
Patient populations with diagnosis-specific barriers to hospice enrollment
Clinicians identified several patient populations with diagnosis-specific barriers to hospice enrollment, including patients with end-stage renal disease, hematological malignancies, heart failure, COPD, dementia, ventilator dependence, stroke, and complex social and behavioral health needs (Table 3). Hospice enrollment often requires patients to forego treatments that are not covered by the Medicare hospice per-diem reimbursement structure. Provider hesitancy delayed referrals for patients with heart failure, COPD, and dementia. Finally, patients with high care needs, including those on ventilators or with prior strokes, were disproportionately impacted by inadequate caregiving support, particularly when there were comorbid psychosocial challenges.
Patient Populations with Diagnosis-Specific Barriers to Hospice Enrollment Population
Variability of for-profit and non-profit agencies
Clinicians expressed mixed views on for-profit and non-profit agencies. Some reported poor experiences with for-profit hospices, particularly given the lack of associated inpatient hospice units, requiring reliance on hospitals or contracted facilities to provide inpatient level of care. On the contrary, some clinicians recognized that for-profit agencies were able to enroll patients with more expensive treatments given more financial flexibility.
Facilitators to hospice
Despite barriers, clinicians identified several facilitators that support successful transitions to hospice, including resources available through hospice, financial support of the Medicare hospice benefit, and effective communication (Table 4). Hospice was described as providing the most care at home, given access to the equipment, medications, multidisciplinary team, 24/7 nurse on-call, bereavement counseling, and respite care. Furthermore, the fact that these services are covered by the Medicare hospice benefit provides immense relief for patients and families at end of life. Clinicians also recognized that the best transitions to hospice involve effective communication between providers, patients, and families.
Facilitators to Hospice
Discussion
This study identifies key barriers and facilitators to hospice transitions from the perspective of PC clinicians. While clinicians highlighted how hospice and the Medicare benefit provide essential services, critical barriers remain, including lack of caregiving support, uncertainty about care location, and inadequate communication. Structural barriers, including limited reimbursement and uncertainty around eligibility and prognostication, shape which patient populations can benefit from hospice care. Furthermore, variability between for-profit and non-profit hospices both expand options and introduce inconsistency of care.
Clinicians consistently identified lack of caregiving support as a major barrier to hospice care. End-of-life care often requires multiple caregivers, yet families face limitations due to work obligations, physical demands on older spouses, and financial constraints. These findings align with prior literature documenting the reliance on extensive unpaid care.11–13 Caregiving also carries emotional and physical burdens, as caregivers perform personal care needs or administer complex medications. Inadequate caregiving support often raises questions about hospice care location. Although clinicians may feel pressure to discharge patients to home hospice, insufficient caregiving or unsafe home environments can make this impossible. When home hospice is not feasible, patients then fall into a gap without Medicaid or the personal finances to pay for long-term care facilities, highlighting the need for policy-level solutions.
Even when hospice care is feasible, services vary widely. Certain geographic areas, particularly in rural regions, have limited access. 14 Agencies differ in services offered, financial structures, and clinical expertise. 15 Staffing shortages, worsened by the Covid-19 pandemic, further exacerbated these disparities, in some cases requiring hospice agencies to decrease capacity. The tax status of agencies also adds to the variability, with clinicians expressing mixed perspectives on for-profit hospices. Some described for-profit agencies offering inferior care, consistent with prior evidence of poorer caregiving experiences with for-profit hospices. 16 Other clinicians recognized greater flexibility with more concurrent care options, such as dialysis, tube feeds, and ventilator support. Overall, clinicians emphasized the importance of inpatient hospice units for managing escalating care needs, which in the state of North Carolina are only offered by non-profit agencies.
These barriers disproportionately impact certain patient populations. Lack of concurrent care deters patients with end-stage renal disease, hematological malignancies, and heart failure from hospice enrollment. Costly treatments associated with these diagnoses are not reimbursed by hospice, even when they may provide symptomatic relief that aligns with a palliative philosophy. In some cases, the decision to transition to hospice means patients must be willing to limit lifespan for comfort care. 17 Patients with high caregiving needs, including those with strokes, ventilator dependence, or complex social and behavioral health needs, remain underserved. Finally, limited goals of care conversations and prognostic uncertainty delay hospice referral for patients with COPD, heart failure, or dementia, even when their goals align with a comfort-based approach.
Poor communication between patients, families, and providers further complicates transitions, and often results in unrealistic expectations and mistrust. This unclear communication may be due to a lack of clinician education about hospice and its capabilities. Similar to prior studies, clinicians emphasized the importance of assessing patient knowledge of hospice and ensuring their goals align before initiating the transition in care.18,19 Despite these barriers, clinicians recognized that hospice provides the most care at home regardless of patient insurance status, given resources and coverage through the Medicare hospice benefit. Effective communication and early goals of care discussions allow for improved transitions to hospice. 20 Thus, clinicians must be educated about hospice so that they can establish realistic expectations, address misconceptions, and support successful transitions.
Our study has several important limitations. First, our sample size was small with 10 PC clinicians. We also interviewed clinicians who practiced at a single health system in North Carolina. Other institutions or states may have different resources and structures supporting patients on hospice care. As a result, patients in other contexts may face unique facilitators and barriers, and clinicians may have different experiences with hospice agencies. Future work should include broader interdisciplinary perspectives, including hospice clinicians, nurses, and chaplains. Improving hospice transitions will require interventions at both policy and practice levels. Policy reforms that better align reimbursement structures with patient needs, including expanded access to concurrent care models, may reduce barriers for patients receiving ongoing disease-directed therapies. From a clinical perspective, earlier goals-of-care conversations, improved prognostic tools, and greater clinician education about hospice may support more timely and effective transitions.
Authors’ Contributions
Study conception and design: M.M.N., K.W.H., and T.W.L. Material preparation, data collection, and analysis: M.M.N., J.G.C., and T.W.L. Original draft and article revision: All authors.
Ethical Considerations and Consent to Participate
This study was approved by the Duke University Health System Institutional Review Board (Pro00112873). All participants provided written consent prior to participation in the study.
Data Availability Statement
De-identified data supporting the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author upon reasonable request.
Footnotes
Acknowledgments
The authors are thankful to the clinicians who took the time to participate in the research.
Author Disclosure Statement
Researchers declare the following conflicts of interest: T.W.L. reports personal fees for consulting or advisory boards from AbbVie, Agios/Servier, AstraZeneca, Astellas, BMS/Celgene Genentech, GSK, Gilead, Lilly, Novartis, Pfizer, Seattle Genetics, and ThymeCare; royalties from UpToDate; equity interest in DosenTrx and ThymeCare; speakers bureau fees from Agios/Servier, AbbVie, BMS/Celgene, Daiichi-Sankyo, Incyte, Kura, Rigel, and Syndax; grants and/or research contracts from the American Cancer Society, AstraZeneca, BMS, Jazz Pharmaceuticals, the NINR/NIH, and Seattle Genetics.
Funding Information
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors. TWL is a Scholar in Clinical Research of Blood Cancer United (formerly known as the Leukemia & Lymphoma Society).
