PP07.003 Why do some people record place of death preferences and some not? Analysis from an electronic palliative care coordination system

P. McFarlane, K. Sleeman, J. Riley, J. Droney
{"title":"PP07.003 Why do some people record place of death preferences and some not? Analysis from an electronic palliative care coordination system","authors":"P. McFarlane, K. Sleeman, J. Riley, J. Droney","doi":"10.1136/spcare-2023-acp.69","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"BackgroundConsideration and documentation of where individual patients want to die is an important component of advance care planning and helps facilitate care aligned with patients' wishes.AimTo examine factors associated with recording a preferred place of death in Coordinate My Care, a large Electronic Palliative Care Coordination System in London.MethodsAdults with a Coordinate My Care Record, between 01/01/2018 and 05/03/2021 were included. Logistic regression modelling was used to identify clinical, social and demographic factors associated with documenting preference for place of death. Timing of record creation (pre and during the Covid-19 pandemic) was also included.Results72,591 records were analysed (52,006 (71.6%) with a recorded preferred place of death and 20,585 (28.4%) without). Individuals with a recorded preferred place of death were more likely to be older (Aged 80+ compared to <80) OR: 1.19, CI 1.14 – 1.24), less functionally independent (WHO performance status 4 compared to 1, OR: 1.28, CI 1.19 – 1.37), have a ‘Do Not Attempt Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation' status (OR: 1.70, CI 1.60 – 1.80), be from least deprived areas (compared to most deprived, OR: 1.08, CI 1.01 – 1.16), live in a care home (OR:1.42, CI 1.35 – 1.50), create their record in the General Practice setting (compared to at an hospital setting OR: 1.42, CI 1.34 – 1.53) and have created their record during the initial wave of the pandemic (compared to pre-pandemic OR: 1.56, CI 1.49 – 1.63).ConclusionsHealth status, living and socio-economic circumstances and the Covid-19 pandemic were associated with whether or not patients had a documented preference for place of death. This has implications for professional training and patient empowerment in terms of having conversations about what matters most to patients at the end of life and how to provide patient centred end-of-life care.","PeriodicalId":20317,"journal":{"name":"Poster Discussion Abstracts","volume":"43 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Poster Discussion Abstracts","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1136/spcare-2023-acp.69","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

BackgroundConsideration and documentation of where individual patients want to die is an important component of advance care planning and helps facilitate care aligned with patients' wishes.AimTo examine factors associated with recording a preferred place of death in Coordinate My Care, a large Electronic Palliative Care Coordination System in London.MethodsAdults with a Coordinate My Care Record, between 01/01/2018 and 05/03/2021 were included. Logistic regression modelling was used to identify clinical, social and demographic factors associated with documenting preference for place of death. Timing of record creation (pre and during the Covid-19 pandemic) was also included.Results72,591 records were analysed (52,006 (71.6%) with a recorded preferred place of death and 20,585 (28.4%) without). Individuals with a recorded preferred place of death were more likely to be older (Aged 80+ compared to <80) OR: 1.19, CI 1.14 – 1.24), less functionally independent (WHO performance status 4 compared to 1, OR: 1.28, CI 1.19 – 1.37), have a ‘Do Not Attempt Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation' status (OR: 1.70, CI 1.60 – 1.80), be from least deprived areas (compared to most deprived, OR: 1.08, CI 1.01 – 1.16), live in a care home (OR:1.42, CI 1.35 – 1.50), create their record in the General Practice setting (compared to at an hospital setting OR: 1.42, CI 1.34 – 1.53) and have created their record during the initial wave of the pandemic (compared to pre-pandemic OR: 1.56, CI 1.49 – 1.63).ConclusionsHealth status, living and socio-economic circumstances and the Covid-19 pandemic were associated with whether or not patients had a documented preference for place of death. This has implications for professional training and patient empowerment in terms of having conversations about what matters most to patients at the end of life and how to provide patient centred end-of-life care.
为什么有些人会记录死亡地点而有些人没有呢?来自电子缓和医疗协调系统的分析
考虑和记录单个患者希望在哪里死亡是预先护理计划的重要组成部分,有助于促进与患者意愿一致的护理。目的研究在伦敦大型电子姑息治疗协调系统“协调我的护理”中记录首选死亡地点的相关因素。方法纳入2018年1月1日至2021年3月5日期间有协调护理记录的成年人。使用逻辑回归模型确定与记录死亡地点偏好相关的临床、社会和人口因素。记录创建的时间(在Covid-19大流行之前和期间)也包括在内。结果共分析病例72591份,其中有首选死亡地点记录的病例52006份(71.6%),无首选死亡地点记录的病例20585份(28.4%)。有首选死亡地点记录的个体更可能是老年人(80岁以上与80岁以下相比),功能独立性较差(WHO表现状态4与1相比,OR: 1.28, CI 1.19 - 1.37),具有“不尝试心肺复苏”状态(OR: 1.70, CI 1.60 - 1.80),来自最贫困地区(与最贫困地区相比,OR:1.08, CI 1.01 - 1.16),住在护理院(OR:1.42, CI 1.35 - 1.50),在普通诊所环境中创建记录(相比于在医院环境OR:1.42, CI 1.34 - 1.53),并在大流行的初始浪潮中创建记录(相比于大流行前OR: 1.56, CI 1.49 - 1.63)。结论健康状况、生活和社会经济环境以及Covid-19大流行与患者是否有记录的死亡地点偏好有关。这对专业培训和患者授权具有启示意义,就讨论临终时对患者最重要的事情以及如何提供以患者为中心的临终关怀而言。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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