Chitnis X A, Georghiou T, Steventon A, Bardsley M J
Director of Research, The Nuffield Trust, London, UK.
BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2013 Dec;3(4):422-30. doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2012-000424. Epub 2013 Jun 6.
To assess the effect of routinely delivered home-based end-of-life care on hospital use at the end of life and place of death.
Retrospective analysis using matched controls and administrative data.
Community-based care in England.
29,538 people aged over 18 who received Marie Curie nursing support compared with 29,538 controls individually matched on variables including: age, socioeconomic deprivation, prior hospital use, number of chronic conditions and prior diagnostic history.
Home-based end-of-life nursing care delivered by the Marie Curie Nursing Service (MCNS), compared with end-of-life care available to those who did not receive MCNS care.
Proportion of people who died at home; numbers of emergency and elective inpatient admissions, outpatient attendances and attendances at emergency departments in the period until death; and notional costs of hospital care.
Intervention patients were significantly more likely to die at home and less likely to die in hospital than matched controls (unadjusted OR 6.16, 95% CI 5.94 to 6.38, p<0.001). Hospital activity was significantly lower among intervention than matched control patients (emergency admissions: 0.14 vs 0.44 admissions per person, p<0.001) and average costs across all hospital services were lower (unadjusted average costs per person, £610 (intervention patients) vs £1750 (matched controls), p<0.001). Greater activity and cost differences were seen in those patients who had been receiving home nursing for longer.
Home-based end-of-life care offers the potential to reduce demand for acute hospital care and increase the number of people able to die at home.
评估常规提供的居家临终关怀对临终时医院利用情况及死亡地点的影响。
采用匹配对照和行政数据进行回顾性分析。
英国的社区护理。
29538名18岁以上接受玛丽·居里护理支持的人,与29538名在年龄、社会经济剥夺程度、既往医院利用情况、慢性病数量和既往诊断史等变量上进行个体匹配的对照者。
玛丽·居里护理服务(MCNS)提供的居家临终护理,与未接受MCNS护理者可获得的临终护理进行比较。
在家中死亡的人数比例;直至死亡期间的急诊和择期住院入院次数、门诊就诊次数和急诊部门就诊次数;以及医院护理的名义成本。
与匹配的对照者相比,干预组患者在家中死亡的可能性显著更高,在医院死亡的可能性显著更低(未调整的比值比为6.16,95%置信区间为5.94至6.38,p<0.001)。干预组患者的医院活动显著低于匹配的对照患者(急诊入院:每人0.14次入院 vs 0.44次入院,p<0.001),所有医院服务的平均成本也更低(未调整的人均成本,干预组患者为610英镑,匹配对照组为1750英镑,p<0.001)。接受家庭护理时间更长的患者,活动和成本差异更大。
居家临终关怀有可能减少对急性医院护理的需求,并增加在家中死亡的人数。