Trends in Location of Death for Individuals with Primary Ocular Cancer in the United States.

IF 1.6 4区 医学 Q3 OPHTHALMOLOGY
Rochan Ramesh, Rohit Mantena, Urvish Jain, Bhav Jain, Anthony Rios, Edward Christopher Dee, Geoffrey Tabin
{"title":"Trends in Location of Death for Individuals with Primary Ocular Cancer in the United States.","authors":"Rochan Ramesh, Rohit Mantena, Urvish Jain, Bhav Jain, Anthony Rios, Edward Christopher Dee, Geoffrey Tabin","doi":"10.1080/09286586.2026.2741242","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Individuals with ocular cancer (OC) face unique end-of-life (EOL) challenges, including potential vision loss and poor prognosis. Place of death significantly impacts the quality of EOL care, and most patients express a preference for dying at home. Understanding where patients with OC die is crucial for assessing care quality and equity.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Participants included all 5,196 US decedents from 2003 to 2020 whose underlying cause of death was listed as ocular cancer (ICD-10 codes C69.0-C69.9).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 5,196 decedents with OC, 2,824 (54.3%) died at home, 912 (17.6%) in hospitals, 607 (11.7%) in nursing facilities, 523 (10%) in hospice, and 330 (6.4%) in outpatient or emergency department facilities. Compared to patients aged 64 or younger, patients aged 85 or older were significantly less likely to die in a hospital (OR: 0.32 [95% CI: 0.24-0.43]) and at home (OR: 0.67 [95% CI: 0.56-0.80]), but markedly more likely to die in a nursing facility (OR: 8.30 [95% CI: 6.27-10.99]). Significant racial disparities were found; compared to White patients, Black (OR: 2.75 [95% CI: 1.93-3.90]), Asian (OR: 2.56 [1.57-4.17]), and Hispanic (OR: 1.90 [1.42-2.55]), patients were all significantly more likely to die in a hospital. Black patients were also less likely to die at home (OR: 0.59 [95% CI: 0.42-0.83]).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Significant sociodemographic disparities exist in the location of death for patients with OC, particularly by age and race. Patients from racial and ethnic minority groups are disproportionately more likely to die in hospitals and less likely to die at home, suggesting potential inequities in access to preferred EOL care.</p>","PeriodicalId":19607,"journal":{"name":"Ophthalmic epidemiology","volume":" ","pages":"1-4"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2026-10-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Ophthalmic epidemiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/09286586.2026.2741242","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"OPHTHALMOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Purpose: Individuals with ocular cancer (OC) face unique end-of-life (EOL) challenges, including potential vision loss and poor prognosis. Place of death significantly impacts the quality of EOL care, and most patients express a preference for dying at home. Understanding where patients with OC die is crucial for assessing care quality and equity.

Methods: Participants included all 5,196 US decedents from 2003 to 2020 whose underlying cause of death was listed as ocular cancer (ICD-10 codes C69.0-C69.9).

Results: Of the 5,196 decedents with OC, 2,824 (54.3%) died at home, 912 (17.6%) in hospitals, 607 (11.7%) in nursing facilities, 523 (10%) in hospice, and 330 (6.4%) in outpatient or emergency department facilities. Compared to patients aged 64 or younger, patients aged 85 or older were significantly less likely to die in a hospital (OR: 0.32 [95% CI: 0.24-0.43]) and at home (OR: 0.67 [95% CI: 0.56-0.80]), but markedly more likely to die in a nursing facility (OR: 8.30 [95% CI: 6.27-10.99]). Significant racial disparities were found; compared to White patients, Black (OR: 2.75 [95% CI: 1.93-3.90]), Asian (OR: 2.56 [1.57-4.17]), and Hispanic (OR: 1.90 [1.42-2.55]), patients were all significantly more likely to die in a hospital. Black patients were also less likely to die at home (OR: 0.59 [95% CI: 0.42-0.83]).

Conclusions: Significant sociodemographic disparities exist in the location of death for patients with OC, particularly by age and race. Patients from racial and ethnic minority groups are disproportionately more likely to die in hospitals and less likely to die at home, suggesting potential inequities in access to preferred EOL care.

美国原发性眼癌患者死亡地点的趋势
目的:眼癌(OC)患者面临着独特的生命末期(EOL)挑战,包括潜在的视力丧失和不良预后。死亡地点显著影响EOL护理的质量,大多数患者表达了在家中死亡的偏好。了解OC患者的死亡地点对于评估护理质量和公平性至关重要。方法:参与者包括2003年至2020年期间所有5196名潜在死亡原因被列为眼癌(ICD-10代码C69.0-C69.9)的美国死者。结果:5196例OC患者中,2824例(54.3%)死于家中,912例(17.6%)死于医院,607例(11.7%)死于护理机构,523例(10%)死于安宁疗护,330例(6.4%)死于门急诊。与64岁或以下的患者相比,85岁或以上的患者在医院死亡的可能性(or: 0.32 [95% CI: 0.24-0.43])和在家中死亡的可能性(or: 0.67 [95% CI: 0.56-0.80])显著降低,但在护理机构死亡的可能性明显增加(or: 8.30 [95% CI: 6.27-10.99])。存在明显的种族差异;与白人患者、黑人患者(OR: 2.75 [95% CI: 1.93-3.90])、亚洲患者(OR: 2.56[1.57-4.17])和西班牙裔患者(OR: 1.90[1.42-2.55])相比,患者在医院死亡的可能性都明显更高。黑人患者在家中死亡的可能性也较低(OR: 0.59 [95% CI: 0.42-0.83])。结论:OC患者的死亡地点存在显著的社会人口统计学差异,尤其是年龄和种族差异。来自种族和少数民族群体的患者在医院死亡的可能性更大,在家中死亡的可能性更小,这表明在获得首选EOL护理方面存在潜在的不平等。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Ophthalmic epidemiology
Ophthalmic epidemiology 医学-眼科学
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
5.60%
发文量
61
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Ophthalmic Epidemiology is dedicated to the publication of original research into eye and vision health in the fields of epidemiology, public health and the prevention of blindness. Ophthalmic Epidemiology publishes editorials, original research reports, systematic reviews and meta-analysis articles, brief communications and letters to the editor on all subjects related to ophthalmic epidemiology. A broad range of topics is suitable, such as: evaluating the risk of ocular diseases, general and specific study designs, screening program implementation and evaluation, eye health care access, delivery and outcomes, therapeutic efficacy or effectiveness, disease prognosis and quality of life, cost-benefit analysis, biostatistical theory and risk factor analysis. We are looking to expand our engagement with reports of international interest, including those regarding problems affecting developing countries, although reports from all over the world potentially are suitable. Clinical case reports, small case series (not enough for a cohort analysis) articles and animal research reports are not appropriate for this journal.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信
小红书