Recent findings narrate profiteering detrimentally impacting hospice care quality. However, no study has examined the caregiver experience of emotional and spiritual support expressed online. The purpose was to evaluate the hospice caregiver’s experience of emotional, spiritual, and bereavement support and whether the care was respectful and compassionate to the care unit.

Retrospective mixed methods of sentiment and quantitative analysis. Sources were online caregiver reviews (n = 4,279), Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS) data on the 50 largest US hospices.

Caring and compassionate professionals were lauded in nonprofit (+.57) and for-profit settings (+.46). The nonprofit experience was in the excellent range (+42) for emotional, spiritual, and bereavement support but fell to dissatisfying (–.15) among for-profits. A respectful experience (16%) was much less commonly expressed than a compassionate one (38%). Distribution of CAHPS “Treating patient with respect” (M = 89.62, SD = 2.63) and “Emotional and spiritual support” (M = 89.80, SD = 2.04) limited inter-hospice comparisons.

Compassionate professionals were thanked and praised regardless of profit status. Sadly, anger was expressed toward large, for-profits more fixated on census than emotional, spiritual, and bereavement support; thankfully nonprofits were more supportive. CAHPS items for “Treating patient with respect” and “Emotional, spiritual support” offer limited discriminating value since low CAHPS performers always had relatively high scores on these 2, yet otherwise low scores on the remaining 6. Online reviews on the same topics provide a more substantive and realistic appraisal – distinguishing high from low performers. A higher bar than mere respect is needed for the tender experience of death, dying, and grieving. Compassion is an especially relevant addition to CAHPS since caregivers named compassionate staff as a distinguishing factor. Parity for mental health at end of life is a vital research topic. Future research should also explore the caregiver expectations set on admission.

With a fraction of hospices having their Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (CAHPS®) scores on Hospice Compare, a significant reservoir of hospice quality data remains in online caregiver reviews. The purpose of this study was to develop a method and model of hospice quality assessment from caregiver reviews using Watson’s carative model.

Retrospective mixed methods of pilot qualitative thematic analysis and sentiment analysis using NLP of Google and Yelp caregiver reviews between 2013 and 2023. We employed stratified sampling, weighted according to hospice size, to emulate the daily census of enrollees across the United States. Sentiment analysis was performed (n = 3393) using Google NLP.

Two themes with the highest prevalence had moderately positive sentiments (S): Caring staff (+.47) and Care quality, comfort and cleanliness (+.41). Other positive sentiment scores with high prevalence were Gratitude and thanks (+.81), “Treating the patient with respect” (+.54), and “Emotional, spiritual, bereavement support” (+.60). Lowest sentiment scores were “Insurance, administrative or billing” (–.37), “Lack of staffing” (–.32), and “Communication with the family” (–.01).

In the developed quality model, caregivers recommended hospices with caring staff, providing quality care, responsive to requests, and offering family support, including bereavement care. All ten Watson's carative factors and all eight CAHPS measures were presented in the discovered review themes of the quality model. Close-ended CAHPS scores and open-ended online reviews have substantial conceptual overlap and complementary insights. Future hospice quality research should explore caregiver expectations and compare review themes by profit status.