CONTEXT: There are concerns that policies aimed to prevent opioid misuse may unintentionally reduce access to opioids for patients at end-of-life. OBJECTIVE: We assessed trends in opioid prescribing among patients on discharge from the hospital to hospice care. METHODS: This was a retrospective cohort study among adult (age > /=18 years) patients discharged from a 544-576 bed, academic medical center to hospice care between January 1, 2010 to December 31, 2018. Study data were collected from a repository of patients' electronic health record data. Our primary outcome was the frequency of opioid prescribing on discharge to hospice care. Our primary exposure was the calendar year of discharge. We also investigated non-opioid analgesic prescribing and stratified opioid prescribing trends by patient characteristics (e.g., demographics, cancer diagnosis, and location of hospice care). RESULTS: Among 2,648 discharges to hospice care, mean (standard deviation) age was 65.8 (16.0) years, 46.3% were female, and 58.7% had a cancer diagnosis. Opioid prescribing on discharge to hospice care decreased significantly from 91.2% (95% confidence interval (CI) = 87.1%-94.1%) in 2010 to 79.3% (95% CI = 74.3%-83.5%) in 2018 adjusting for age, sex, cancer diagnosis, and location of hospice care. Prescribing of non-opioid analgesic medications increased over the same time period. CONCLUSIONS: We observed a statistically significant decreasing trend in opioid prescribing on discharge to hospice care. Further research should aim to confirm these findings and to identify opportunities to ensure optimal pain management among patients transitioning to hospice care.

BACKGROUND: Key to high-quality care of dying hospice patients at home is whether the hospice provides adequate training so the caregiver can safely care for the patient. OBJECTIVE: The study objective was to develop and validate a survey of hospice training for caregivers to ensure safe, high-quality care in the home setting. DESIGN: Our survey design was cross-sectional. Bereaved respondents of individuals who died at home under the care of hospice were surveyed three to six months postdeath. MEASUREMENTS: Items were developed based on advice of an expert panel, focus groups of hospice caregivers, and literature review, with 12 items developed for testing and examining 8 key processes of care. We examined the validity and reliability of the assessment using factor analysis, correlational analyses, and multivariable modeling. RESULTS: Our sample consisted of 262 primary caregivers (mean age 62.4, 76.7% female, 58.8% non-Hispanic white). Six questions focused on providing the caregiver with information, while another six focused on the training that hospice provided. Based on model fit and Cronbach's alpha, we dropped the information items. The items that examined hospice training demonstrated a one-factor solution and a Cronbach's of 0.90. We examined correlations of the multi-item composite with overall rating of quality of care (0.53), overall distress (0.31), and whether the respondent would recommend this hospice to others (0.49). There were no significant sociodemographic correlates of concerns with training. CONCLUSIONS: Sufficient preliminary reliability and validity warrants further testing of this composite to examine the adequacy of training provided to family members to care safely for the patient.