Suppr超能文献

医生与非医生接受的临终关怀比较。

End-of-Life Care Received by Physicians Compared With Nonphysicians.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesia, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

Interdepartmental Division of Critical Care Medicine, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

出版信息

JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Jul 3;2(7):e197650. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.7650.

Abstract

IMPORTANCE

The idea that physicians as patients choose less-aggressive care at the end of life for themselves is an often-cited rationale to advocate for less technology-laden end-of-life care.

OBJECTIVE

To assess end-of-life care received by physicians compared with nonphysicians in a system with universal health care.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: In this population-level decedent cohort study of data from April 1, 2004, through March 31, 2015 (fiscal years 2004-2014), in Ontario, Canada, 2507 physicians were matched approximately 1:3 to 7513 nonphysicians (ie, individuals who never were registered as a physician with the College of Physicians and Surgeons of Ontario) according to age, sex, income quintile, and location of residence.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was location of death. Other outcomes included measures of health care use in the last 6 months of life. Differences were assessed using Poisson regression with robust error variances, adjusting for the Charlson Comorbidity Index.

RESULTS

In total, 2516 physicians and 954 836 nonphysicians died between April 1, 2004, and March 31, 2015, in Ontario; 2247 physicians (89.3%) and 474 182 nonphysicians (49.7%) were men. The median (interquartile range) age at death was 82 (74-87) years for the physicians and 80 (68-87) years for the nonphysicians. After matching, data for 2507 physicians and 7513 nonphysicians were analyzed. For physicians, the risk of death at home was no different from that for nonphysicians (42.8% vs 39.0%; adjusted relative risk [aRR], 1.04; 95% CI, 0.99-1.09), but the risk of death in an intensive care unit was increased (11.9% vs 10.0%; aRR, 1.22; 95% CI, 1.08-1.39). In the prior 6 months, physicians had a decreased risk of an emergency department visit (73.0% vs 78.4%; aRR, 0.96; 95% CI, 0.94-0.98) but increased risks of an intensive care unit admission (20.8% vs 19.1%; aRR, 1.14; 95% CI, 1.05-1.24) and of receipt of palliative care services (52.9% vs 47.4%; aRR, 1.18; 95% CI, 1.13-1.23). Among a subgroup of 457 physicians and 1347 nonphysicians with cancer, the risk of death at home or intensive care unit was increased (37.6% vs 28.6%; aRR, 1.30; 95% CI, 1.13-1.50), as was the risk of receiving chemotherapy in the last 6 months of life.

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

There was no difference overall for physicians compared with nonphysicians in terms of the likelihood of dying at home; physicians were more likely to die in an intensive care unit and to receive chemotherapy, but also to receive palliative care services. These findings suggest that physicians do not consistently opt for less-aggressive care but instead receive end-of-life care that includes both intensive and palliative care. These findings inform a more nuanced perspective of what physicians may perceive to be optimal care at the end of life.

摘要

重要性

医生作为患者,在生命末期选择对自己不那么激进的治疗方案,这一观点常被用作提倡减轻生命末期技术密集型治疗的理由。

目的

评估在一个拥有全民医疗保健的系统中,医生与非医生相比接受的生命末期护理。

设计、设置和参与者:在这项来自加拿大安大略省的 2004 年 4 月 1 日至 2015 年 3 月 31 日(2004-2014 财年)的 4 月 1 日至 2015 年 3 月 31 日(2004-2014 财年)的人群水平死亡队列研究中,根据年龄、性别、收入五分位数和居住地,将 2507 名医生与大约 7513 名非医生(即从未在安大略省医师和外科医生学院注册为医生的个人)进行了大约 1:3 的匹配。

主要结局和测量

主要结局是死亡地点。其他结局包括生命最后 6 个月的医疗保健使用情况。使用泊松回归进行差异评估,调整了 Charlson 合并症指数。

结果

在安大略省,2004 年 4 月 1 日至 2015 年 3 月 31 日期间,共有 2516 名医生和 954836 名非医生死亡;2247 名医生(89.3%)和 474182 名非医生(49.7%)为男性。医生的死亡年龄中位数(四分位距)为 82(74-87)岁,非医生为 80(68-87)岁。在匹配后,对 2507 名医生和 7513 名非医生进行了数据分析。对于医生来说,在家中死亡的风险与非医生没有不同(42.8%对 39.0%;调整后相对风险[ARR],1.04;95%CI,0.99-1.09),但在重症监护病房死亡的风险增加(11.9%对 10.0%;ARR,1.22;95%CI,1.08-1.39)。在之前的 6 个月中,医生急诊就诊的风险降低(73.0%对 78.4%;ARR,0.96;95%CI,0.94-0.98),但重症监护病房入院(20.8%对 19.1%;ARR,1.14;95%CI,1.05-1.24)和接受姑息治疗服务(52.9%对 47.4%;ARR,1.18;95%CI,1.13-1.23)的风险增加。在 457 名医生和 1347 名癌症非医生的亚组中,在家中或重症监护病房死亡的风险增加(37.6%对 28.6%;ARR,1.30;95%CI,1.13-1.50),在生命的最后 6 个月接受化疗的风险也增加。

结论和相关性

与非医生相比,医生在居家死亡的可能性方面总体上没有差异;医生更有可能在重症监护病房死亡,并接受化疗,但也更有可能接受姑息治疗。这些发现表明,医生并不总是选择不那么激进的治疗方案,而是接受包括重症和姑息治疗在内的生命末期护理。这些发现为医生在生命末期可能认为是最佳护理的更细微的观点提供了信息。

相似文献

1
End-of-Life Care Received by Physicians Compared With Nonphysicians.医生与非医生接受的临终关怀比较。
JAMA Netw Open. 2019 Jul 3;2(7):e197650. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2019.7650.

引用本文的文献

3
The need for education about death in medical practice.医学实践中关于死亡教育的必要性。
Colomb Med (Cali). 2022 Dec 30;53(4):e1005510. doi: 10.25100/cm.v53i4.5510. eCollection 2022 Oct-Dec.
7
When Intensive Care Becomes Good End-of-Life Care.当重症监护成为优质的临终关怀时。
Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2020 Apr 1;201(7):762. doi: 10.1164/rccm.202001-0076ED.

本文引用的文献

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验