在生命最后 3 个月中接受专科姑息治疗的成年人的死亡地点:与首选地点、实际地点和死亡地点一致性相关的因素。

IF 1.3 4区 医学 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Journal of Palliative Care Pub Date : 2024-07-01 Epub Date: 2024-02-25 DOI:10.1177/08258597241231042
Samantha Smith, Aoife Brick, Bridget Johnston, Karen Ryan, Regina McQuillan, Sinead O'Hara, Peter May, Elsa Droog, Barbara Daveson, R Sean Morrison, Irene J Higginson, Charles Normand
{"title":"在生命最后 3 个月中接受专科姑息治疗的成年人的死亡地点:与首选地点、实际地点和死亡地点一致性相关的因素。","authors":"Samantha Smith, Aoife Brick, Bridget Johnston, Karen Ryan, Regina McQuillan, Sinead O'Hara, Peter May, Elsa Droog, Barbara Daveson, R Sean Morrison, Irene J Higginson, Charles Normand","doi":"10.1177/08258597241231042","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Objectives:</b> Congruence between the preferred and actual place of death is recognised as an important quality indicator in end-of-life care. However, there may be complexities about preferences that are ignored in summary congruence measures. This article examined factors associated with preferred place of death, actual place of death, and congruence for a sample of patients who had received specialist palliative care in the last three months of life in Ireland. <b>Methods:</b> This article analysed merged data from two previously published mortality follow-back surveys: Economic Evaluation of Palliative Care in Ireland (EEPCI); Irish component of International Access, Rights and Empowerment (IARE I). Logistic regression models examined factors associated with (a) preferences for home death versus institutional setting, (b) home death versus hospital death, and (c) congruent versus non-congruent death. <b>Setting:</b> Four regions with differing levels of specialist palliative care development in Ireland. <b>Participants:</b> Mean age 77, 50% female/male, 19% living alone, 64% main diagnosis cancer. Data collected 2011-2015, regression model sample sizes: n = 342-351. <b>Results:</b> Congruence between preferred and actual place of death in the raw merged dataset was 51%. Patients living alone were significantly less likely to prefer home versus institution death (OR 0.389, 95%CI 0.157-0.961), less likely to die at home (OR 0.383, 95%CI 0.274-0.536), but had no significant association with congruence. <b>Conclusions:</b> The findings highlight the value in examining place of death preferences as well as congruence, because preferences may be influenced by what is feasible rather than what patients would like. The analyses also underline the importance of well-resourced community-based supports, including homecare, facilitating hospital discharge, and management of complex (eg, non-cancer) conditions, to facilitate patients to die in their preferred place.</p>","PeriodicalId":51096,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Palliative Care","volume":" ","pages":"184-193"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11097611/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Place of Death for Adults Receiving Specialist Palliative Care in Their Last 3 Months of Life: Factors Associated With Preferred Place, Actual Place, and Place of Death Congruence.\",\"authors\":\"Samantha Smith, Aoife Brick, Bridget Johnston, Karen Ryan, Regina McQuillan, Sinead O'Hara, Peter May, Elsa Droog, Barbara Daveson, R Sean Morrison, Irene J Higginson, Charles Normand\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/08258597241231042\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Objectives:</b> Congruence between the preferred and actual place of death is recognised as an important quality indicator in end-of-life care. However, there may be complexities about preferences that are ignored in summary congruence measures. This article examined factors associated with preferred place of death, actual place of death, and congruence for a sample of patients who had received specialist palliative care in the last three months of life in Ireland. <b>Methods:</b> This article analysed merged data from two previously published mortality follow-back surveys: Economic Evaluation of Palliative Care in Ireland (EEPCI); Irish component of International Access, Rights and Empowerment (IARE I). Logistic regression models examined factors associated with (a) preferences for home death versus institutional setting, (b) home death versus hospital death, and (c) congruent versus non-congruent death. <b>Setting:</b> Four regions with differing levels of specialist palliative care development in Ireland. <b>Participants:</b> Mean age 77, 50% female/male, 19% living alone, 64% main diagnosis cancer. Data collected 2011-2015, regression model sample sizes: n = 342-351. <b>Results:</b> Congruence between preferred and actual place of death in the raw merged dataset was 51%. Patients living alone were significantly less likely to prefer home versus institution death (OR 0.389, 95%CI 0.157-0.961), less likely to die at home (OR 0.383, 95%CI 0.274-0.536), but had no significant association with congruence. <b>Conclusions:</b> The findings highlight the value in examining place of death preferences as well as congruence, because preferences may be influenced by what is feasible rather than what patients would like. The analyses also underline the importance of well-resourced community-based supports, including homecare, facilitating hospital discharge, and management of complex (eg, non-cancer) conditions, to facilitate patients to die in their preferred place.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51096,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Palliative Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"184-193\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11097611/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Palliative Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/08258597241231042\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/2/25 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08258597241231042","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/2/25 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:首选死亡地点与实际死亡地点之间的一致性被认为是临终关怀的一项重要质量指标。然而,在简要的一致性测量中,可能会忽略偏好的复杂性。本文以爱尔兰在生命最后三个月接受过专科姑息关怀的患者为样本,研究了与首选死亡地点、实际死亡地点和一致性相关的因素。研究方法本文分析了之前发表的两项死亡率跟踪调查的合并数据:爱尔兰姑息关怀经济评估(EEPCI);国际获取、权利和赋权(IARE I)爱尔兰部分。逻辑回归模型研究了与以下因素相关的因素:(a) 居家死亡与住院死亡的偏好;(b) 居家死亡与住院死亡的偏好;(c) 一致死亡与非一致死亡的偏好。地点爱尔兰四个姑息关怀专业发展水平不同的地区。参与者:平均年龄 77 岁,50% 为女性/男性,19% 独居,64% 主要诊断为癌症。数据收集时间:2011-2015 年,回归模型样本大小:n = 342-351。结果在原始合并数据集中,首选死亡地点与实际死亡地点的一致性为 51%。独居患者更倾向于在家中死亡,而不是在医院死亡(OR 0.389,95%CI 0.157-0.961),更倾向于在家中死亡(OR 0.383,95%CI 0.274-0.536),但与一致性无显著关联。结论研究结果强调了检查死亡地点偏好和一致性的价值,因为偏好可能会受到可行而非患者意愿的影响。分析还强调了资源充足的社区支持的重要性,包括家庭护理、促进出院和管理复杂(如非癌症)病情,以促进患者在其偏好的地点死亡。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Place of Death for Adults Receiving Specialist Palliative Care in Their Last 3 Months of Life: Factors Associated With Preferred Place, Actual Place, and Place of Death Congruence.

Objectives: Congruence between the preferred and actual place of death is recognised as an important quality indicator in end-of-life care. However, there may be complexities about preferences that are ignored in summary congruence measures. This article examined factors associated with preferred place of death, actual place of death, and congruence for a sample of patients who had received specialist palliative care in the last three months of life in Ireland. Methods: This article analysed merged data from two previously published mortality follow-back surveys: Economic Evaluation of Palliative Care in Ireland (EEPCI); Irish component of International Access, Rights and Empowerment (IARE I). Logistic regression models examined factors associated with (a) preferences for home death versus institutional setting, (b) home death versus hospital death, and (c) congruent versus non-congruent death. Setting: Four regions with differing levels of specialist palliative care development in Ireland. Participants: Mean age 77, 50% female/male, 19% living alone, 64% main diagnosis cancer. Data collected 2011-2015, regression model sample sizes: n = 342-351. Results: Congruence between preferred and actual place of death in the raw merged dataset was 51%. Patients living alone were significantly less likely to prefer home versus institution death (OR 0.389, 95%CI 0.157-0.961), less likely to die at home (OR 0.383, 95%CI 0.274-0.536), but had no significant association with congruence. Conclusions: The findings highlight the value in examining place of death preferences as well as congruence, because preferences may be influenced by what is feasible rather than what patients would like. The analyses also underline the importance of well-resourced community-based supports, including homecare, facilitating hospital discharge, and management of complex (eg, non-cancer) conditions, to facilitate patients to die in their preferred place.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of Palliative Care
Journal of Palliative Care 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
3.20
自引率
5.90%
发文量
63
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Journal of Palliative Care is a quarterly, peer-reviewed, international and interdisciplinary forum for practical, critical thought on palliative care and palliative medicine. JPC publishes high-quality original research, opinion papers/commentaries, narrative and humanities works, case reports/case series, and reports on international activities and comparative palliative care.
×
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