Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of California, San Francisco, CA.
Harborview Medical Center and the Division of Pulmonary and Critical Care Medicine, Department of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA.
Chest. 2011 May;139(5):1025-1033. doi: 10.1378/chest.10-3011. Epub 2011 Feb 3.
There is conflicting evidence about the influence of race/ethnicity on the use of intensive care at the end of life, and little is known about the influence of socioeconomic status.
We examined patients who died in the ICU in 15 hospitals. Race/ethnicity was assessed as white and nonwhite. Socioeconomic status included patient education, health insurance, and income by zip code. To explore differences in end-of-life care, we examined the use of (1) advance directives, (2) life-sustaining therapies, (3) symptom management, (4) communication, and (5) support services.
Medical charts were abstracted for 3,138/3,400 patients of whom 2,479 (79%) were white and 659 (21%) were nonwhite (or Hispanic). In logistic regressions adjusted for patient demographics, socioeconomic factors, and site, nonwhite patients were less likely to have living wills (OR, 0.41; 95% CI, 0.32-0.54) and more likely to die with full support (OR, 1.59; 95% CI, 1.30-1.94). In documentation of family conferences, nonwhite patients were more likely to have documentation that prognosis was discussed (OR, 1.47; 95% CI, 1.21-1.77) and that physicians recommended withdrawal of life support (OR, 1.57; 95% CI, 1.11-2.21). Nonwhite patients also were more likely to have discord documented among family members or with clinicians (OR, 1.49; 95% CI, 1.04-2.15). Socioeconomic status did not modify these associations and was not a consistent predictor of end-of-life care.
We found numerous racial/ethnic differences in end-of-life care in the ICU that were not influenced by socioeconomic status. These differences could be due to treatment preferences, disparities, or both. Improving ICU end-of-life care for all patients and families will require a better understanding of these issues.
ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT00685893; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.
种族/民族对生命终末期重症监护使用的影响存在相互矛盾的证据,而社会经济地位的影响则知之甚少。
我们检查了 15 家医院 ICU 中死亡的患者。种族/民族评估为白人和非白人。社会经济地位包括患者教育、健康保险和邮政编码的收入。为了探讨生命终末期护理的差异,我们检查了(1)预先指示、(2)生命维持治疗、(3)症状管理、(4)沟通和(5)支持服务的使用情况。
从 3400 名患者中提取了 3138 份病历,其中 2479 名(79%)为白人,659 名(21%)为非白人(或西班牙裔)。在调整了患者人口统计学、社会经济因素和地点的逻辑回归中,非白人患者更不可能有生存意愿(OR,0.41;95%CI,0.32-0.54),更有可能在完全支持下死亡(OR,1.59;95%CI,1.30-1.94)。在家庭会议记录中,非白人患者更有可能记录预后讨论(OR,1.47;95%CI,1.21-1.77)和医生建议撤回生命支持(OR,1.57;95%CI,1.11-2.21)。非白人患者也更有可能在家庭成员或临床医生之间记录到意见不合(OR,1.49;95%CI,1.04-2.15)。社会经济地位并没有改变这些关联,也不是生命终末期护理的一致预测因素。
我们发现 ICU 生命终末期护理存在许多种族/民族差异,这些差异不受社会经济地位的影响。这些差异可能是由于治疗偏好、差异或两者兼而有之。为了提高所有患者和家庭的 ICU 生命终末期护理水平,需要更好地了解这些问题。
ClinicalTrials.gov;编号:NCT00685893;网址:www.clinicaltrials.gov。