Abstract
Rationale: Invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) may be burdensome for persons with advanced dementia. Research has shown that IMV use in persons with dementia has increased in the United States, Spain, and Canada. Objectives: To compare the outcomes and healthcare costs among hospitalized patients with advanced dementia treated with noninvasive ventilation (NIV) versus IMV. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted among hospitalized patients aged 66 years and older with pneumonia, or septicemia with pneumonia, treated with either NIV or IMV between 2015 and 2017. Persons were included if they had Minimum Data Set (MDS) assessments between 1 and 120 days before hospitalization indicating that they had advanced dementia with four or more impairments in activities of daily living. Propensity-matched analysis was performed using clinical information from the MDS, Chronic Condition Warehouse indicators of chronic disease, and prior use measures. Main outcome measures were survival and healthcare costs up to 1 year after discharge. Results: Among 27,483 hospitalizations between 2015 and 2017, IMV was used in 12.5% and NIV in 8.2%. A propensity-matched model comparing IMV versus NIV using clinical data from the MDS, Chronic Condition Warehouse indicators of chronic diseases, and prior use revealed matches for 96.3% of hospitalizations with the use of IMV. NIV matched cases had a higher 30-day mortality rate compared with IMV cases (58.7% vs. 51.9%, P ⩽ 0.001), but this survival benefit did not persist, as 1-year mortality was slightly higher among subjects with IMV compared with those with NIV (86.5% vs. 85.9%, P > 0.05). One-year healthcare costs after matching were higher among those treated with IMV compared with NIV (mean, $57,122 vs. $33,696; P < 0.001). Conclusions: Among patients with advanced dementia hospitalized with pneumonia or septicemia with pneumonia, improvement in 30-day survival for those treated with IMV compared with NIV must be weighed against lack of 1-year survival benefit and substantially higher costs.