Urban and rural differences in geographical accessibility to inpatient palliative and end-of-life (PEoLC) facilities and place of death: a national population-based study in England, UK.

IF 3 2区 医学 Q2 PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH
Emeka Chukwusa, Julia Verne, Giovanna Polato, Ros Taylor, Irene J Higginson, Wei Gao
{"title":"Urban and rural differences in geographical accessibility to inpatient palliative and end-of-life (PEoLC) facilities and place of death: a national population-based study in England, UK.","authors":"Emeka Chukwusa, Julia Verne, Giovanna Polato, Ros Taylor, Irene J Higginson, Wei Gao","doi":"10.1186/s12942-019-0172-1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Little is known about the role of geographic access to inpatient palliative and end of life care (PEoLC) facilities in place of death and how geographic access varies by settlement (urban and rural). This study aims to fill this evidence gap.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Individual-level death data in 2014 (N = 430,467, aged 25 +) were extracted from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) death registry and linked to the ONS postcode directory file to derive settlement of the deceased. Drive times from patients' place of residence to nearest inpatient PEoLC facilities were used as a proxy estimate of geographic access. A modified Poisson regression was used to examine the association between geographic access to PEoLC facilities and place of death, adjusting for patients' socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. Two models were developed to evaluate the association between geographic access to inpatient PEoLC facilities and place of death. Model 1 compared access to hospice, for hospice deaths versus home deaths, and Model 2 compared access to hospitals, for hospital deaths versus home deaths. The magnitude of association was measured using adjusted prevalence ratios (APRs).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>We found an inverse association between drive time to hospice and hospice deaths (Model 1), with a dose-response relationship. Patients who lived more than 10 min away from inpatient PEoLC facilities in rural areas (Model 1: APR range 0.49-0.80; Model 2: APR range 0.79-0.98) and urban areas (Model 1: APR range 0.50-0.83; Model 2: APR range 0.98-0.99) were less likely to die there, compared to those who lived closer (i.e. ≤ 10 min drive time). The effects were larger in rural areas compared to urban areas.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Geographic access to inpatient PEoLC facilities is associated with where people die, with a stronger association seen for patients who lived in rural areas. The findings highlight the need for the formulation of end of life care policies/strategies that consider differences in settlements types. Findings should feed into local end of life policies and strategies of both developed and developing countries to improve equity in health care delivery for those approaching the end of life.</p>","PeriodicalId":48739,"journal":{"name":"International Journal of Health Geographics","volume":"18 1","pages":"8"},"PeriodicalIF":3.0000,"publicationDate":"2019-05-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6503436/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International Journal of Health Geographics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12942-019-0172-1","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Little is known about the role of geographic access to inpatient palliative and end of life care (PEoLC) facilities in place of death and how geographic access varies by settlement (urban and rural). This study aims to fill this evidence gap.

Methods: Individual-level death data in 2014 (N = 430,467, aged 25 +) were extracted from the Office for National Statistics (ONS) death registry and linked to the ONS postcode directory file to derive settlement of the deceased. Drive times from patients' place of residence to nearest inpatient PEoLC facilities were used as a proxy estimate of geographic access. A modified Poisson regression was used to examine the association between geographic access to PEoLC facilities and place of death, adjusting for patients' socio-demographic and clinical characteristics. Two models were developed to evaluate the association between geographic access to inpatient PEoLC facilities and place of death. Model 1 compared access to hospice, for hospice deaths versus home deaths, and Model 2 compared access to hospitals, for hospital deaths versus home deaths. The magnitude of association was measured using adjusted prevalence ratios (APRs).

Results: We found an inverse association between drive time to hospice and hospice deaths (Model 1), with a dose-response relationship. Patients who lived more than 10 min away from inpatient PEoLC facilities in rural areas (Model 1: APR range 0.49-0.80; Model 2: APR range 0.79-0.98) and urban areas (Model 1: APR range 0.50-0.83; Model 2: APR range 0.98-0.99) were less likely to die there, compared to those who lived closer (i.e. ≤ 10 min drive time). The effects were larger in rural areas compared to urban areas.

Conclusion: Geographic access to inpatient PEoLC facilities is associated with where people die, with a stronger association seen for patients who lived in rural areas. The findings highlight the need for the formulation of end of life care policies/strategies that consider differences in settlements types. Findings should feed into local end of life policies and strategies of both developed and developing countries to improve equity in health care delivery for those approaching the end of life.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

住院姑息治疗和临终关怀(PEoLC)设施的地理可及性和死亡地点的城市和农村差异:英国英格兰的一项基于人群的全国性研究。
背景:人们对住院姑息治疗和临终关怀(PEoLC)设施在死亡地点的地理位置以及地理位置如何因居住地(城市和农村)而异知之甚少。本研究旨在填补这一证据空白。方法:2014年个体水平死亡数据(N = 430467,25岁 +) 从国家统计局(ONS)的死亡登记处提取,并链接到国家统计局的邮政编码目录文件,以获得死者的安置。从患者居住地到最近的PEoLC住院设施的车程被用作地理访问的代理估计。使用修正的泊松回归来检验PEoLC设施的地理访问与死亡地点之间的关系,并根据患者的社会人口统计学和临床特征进行调整。开发了两个模型来评估住院PEoLC设施的地理访问与死亡地点之间的关联。模型1比较了获得临终关怀的机会,临终关怀死亡与家庭死亡,模型2比较了获得医院的机会,医院死亡与家庭死亡率。使用调整后的患病率(APRs)来测量关联程度。结果:我们发现去临终关怀的驾驶时间与临终关怀死亡之间呈负相关(模型1),具有剂量-反应关系。在农村地区(模型1:APR范围0.49-0.80;模型2:APR范围0.79-0.98)和城市地区(模型1:APR范围0.50-0.83;模型2:APR范围0.98-0.99),与居住距离较近(即≤ 10分钟的驱动时间)。与城市地区相比,农村地区的影响更大。结论:使用PEoLC住院设施的地理位置与患者的死亡地点有关,居住在农村地区的患者与死亡地点的相关性更强。研究结果强调,有必要制定考虑住区类型差异的临终关怀政策/战略。研究结果应纳入发达国家和发展中国家的地方生命终结政策和战略,以提高那些即将生命终结的人在提供医疗保健方面的公平性。
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
International Journal of Health Geographics
International Journal of Health Geographics PUBLIC, ENVIRONMENTAL & OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH -
CiteScore
10.20
自引率
2.00%
发文量
17
审稿时长
12 weeks
期刊介绍: A leader among the field, International Journal of Health Geographics is an interdisciplinary, open access journal publishing internationally significant studies of geospatial information systems and science applications in health and healthcare. With an exceptional author satisfaction rate and a quick time to first decision, the journal caters to readers across an array of healthcare disciplines globally. International Journal of Health Geographics welcomes novel studies in the health and healthcare context spanning from spatial data infrastructure and Web geospatial interoperability research, to research into real-time Geographic Information Systems (GIS)-enabled surveillance services, remote sensing applications, spatial epidemiology, spatio-temporal statistics, internet GIS and cyberspace mapping, participatory GIS and citizen sensing, geospatial big data, healthy smart cities and regions, and geospatial Internet of Things and blockchain.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信