Center for Psychosocial Epidemiology and Outcomes Research, and Department of Radiation Oncology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, 450 Brookline Ave, Boston, MA 02215, USA.
JAMA Intern Med. 2013 Jun 24;173(12):1109-17. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2013.903.
Previous studies report associations between medical utilization at the end-of-life (EoL) and religious coping and spiritual support from the medical team. However, the influence of clergy and religious communities on EoL outcomes is unclear.
To determine whether spiritual support from religious communities influences terminally ill patients' medical care and quality of life (QoL) near death.
DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A US-based, multisite cohort study of 343 patients with advanced cancer enrolled from September 2002 through August 2008 and followed up (median duration, 116 days) until death. Baseline interviews assessed support of patients' spiritual needs by religious communities. End-of-life medical care in the final week included the following: hospice, aggressive EoL measures (care in an intensive care unit [ICU], resuscitation, or ventilation), and ICU death.
End-of-life QoL was assessed by caregiver ratings of patient QoL in the last week of life. Multivariable regression analyses were performed on EoL care outcomes in relation to religious community spiritual support, controlling for confounding variables, and were repeated among high religious coping and racial/ethnic minority patients.
Patients reporting high spiritual support from religious communities (43%) were less likely to receive hospice (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.37; 95% CI, 0.20-0.70 [P = .002]), more likely to receive aggressive EoL measures (AOR, 2.62; 95% CI, 1.14-6.06 [P = .02]), and more likely to die in an ICU (AOR, 5.22; 95% CI, 1.71-15.60 [P = .004]). Risks of receiving aggressive EoL interventions and ICU deaths were greater among high religious coping (AOR, 11.02; 95% CI, 2.83-42.89 [P < .001]; and AOR, 22.02; 95% CI, 3.24-149.58 [P = .002]; respectively) and racial/ethnic minority patients (AOR, 8.03; 95% CI, 2.04-31.55 [P = .003]; and AOR, 11.21; 95% CI, 2.29-54.88 [P = .003]; respectively). Among patients well-supported by religious communities, receiving spiritual support from the medical team was associated with higher rates of hospice use (AOR, 2.37; 95% CI, 1.03-5.44 [P = .04]), fewer aggressive interventions (AOR, 0.23; 95% CI, 0.06-0.79 [P = .02]) and fewer ICU deaths (AOR, 0.19; 95% CI, 0.05-0.80 [P = .02]); and EoL discussions were associated with fewer aggressive interventions (AOR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.02-0.63 [P = .01]).
Terminally ill patients who are well supported by religious communities access hospice care less and aggressive medical interventions more near death. Spiritual care and EoL discussions by the medical team may reduce aggressive treatment, highlighting spiritual care as a key component of EoL medical care guidelines.
先前的研究报告表明,在生命末期(EoL)的医疗利用与来自医疗团队的宗教应对和精神支持之间存在关联。然而,神职人员和宗教团体对 EoL 结果的影响尚不清楚。
确定宗教社区提供的精神支持是否会影响终末期患者在接近死亡时的医疗护理和生活质量(QoL)。
设计、地点和参与者:这是一项在美国进行的多地点队列研究,纳入了 2002 年 9 月至 2008 年 8 月期间招募的 343 名患有晚期癌症的患者,并进行了随访(中位持续时间为 116 天),直至死亡。基线访谈评估了宗教社区对患者精神需求的支持。在最后一周的 EoL 医疗护理包括以下内容:临终关怀、积极的 EoL 措施(在重症监护病房[ICU]、复苏或通气的护理)和 ICU 死亡。
通过照顾者在生命最后一周对患者 QoL 的评分来评估 EoL QoL。对 EoL 护理结果进行多变量回归分析,与宗教社区精神支持相关,控制混杂变量,并在高宗教应对和少数族裔患者中重复进行。
报告来自宗教社区的高精神支持(43%)的患者接受临终关怀的可能性较低(调整后的优势比[AOR],0.37;95%CI,0.20-0.70[P=.002]),更有可能接受积极的 EoL 措施(AOR,2.62;95%CI,1.14-6.06[P=.02]),更有可能在 ICU 死亡(AOR,5.22;95%CI,1.71-15.60[P=.004])。高宗教应对(AOR,11.02;95%CI,2.83-42.89[P <.001];和 AOR,22.02;95%CI,3.24-149.58[P=.002])和少数族裔患者(AOR,8.03;95%CI,2.04-31.55[P=.003];和 AOR,11.21;95%CI,2.29-54.88[P=.003])接受积极的 EoL 干预和 ICU 死亡的风险更高。在得到宗教社区充分支持的患者中,接受来自医疗团队的精神支持与更高的临终关怀使用率(AOR,2.37;95%CI,1.03-5.44[P=.04])、较少的积极干预(AOR,0.23;95%CI,0.06-0.79[P=.02])和较少的 ICU 死亡(AOR,0.19;95%CI,0.05-0.80[P=.02])相关;而 EoL 讨论与较少的积极干预(AOR,0.12;95%CI,0.02-0.63[P=.01])相关。
得到宗教社区充分支持的终末期患者在接近死亡时接受临终关怀的可能性较低,接受积极的医疗干预的可能性较高。医疗团队的精神关怀和 EoL 讨论可能会减少积极的治疗,突出了精神关怀作为 EoL 医疗护理指南的一个关键组成部分。