Nguyen Minh-Thuy, Feeney Timothy, Kim Chanmin, Drake F Thurston, Mitchell Suzanne E, Bednarczyk Magdalena, Sanchez Sabrina E
Boston University School of Medicine, Boston, MA, USA.
Boston Medical Center, Boston, MA, USA.
Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2020 Apr;37(4):250-257. doi: 10.1177/1049909119867904. Epub 2019 Aug 6.
There is a paucity of data regarding the utilization of palliative care consultation (PCC) in surgical specialties. We conducted a retrospective review of 2321 adult patients (age ≥18) who died within 6 months of admission to Boston Medical Center from 2012 to 2017. Patients were included for analysis if their length of stay was more than 48 hours and if, based on their diagnoses as determined by literature review and expert consensus, they would have benefited from PCC. Bayesian regression was used to estimate the odds ratio (OR) and 99% credible intervals (CrI) of receiving PCC adjusted for age, sex, race, insurance status, median income, and comorbidity status. Among the 739 patients who fit the inclusion criteria, only 30% (n = 222) received PCC even though 664 (90%) and 75 (10%) of these patients were identified as warranting PCC on medical and surgical services, respectively. Of the 222 patients who received PCC, 214 (96%) were cared for by medical services and 8 (4%) were cared for by surgical services. Patients cared for primarily by surgical were significantly less likely to receive PCC than primary patients of medical service providers (OR, 0.19, 99% CrI, 0.056-0.48). At our institution, many surgical patients appropriate for PCC are unable to benefit from this service due to low consultation numbers. Further investigation is warranted to examine if this phenomenon is observed at other institutions, elucidate the reasons for this disparity, and develop interventions to increase the appropriate use of PCC throughout all medical specialties.
关于外科专业中姑息治疗会诊(PCC)的使用情况,数据匮乏。我们对2012年至2017年期间入住波士顿医疗中心后6个月内死亡的2321名成年患者(年龄≥18岁)进行了回顾性研究。如果患者住院时间超过48小时,并且根据文献综述和专家共识确定的诊断结果,他们本可从PCC中获益,则纳入分析。采用贝叶斯回归来估计接受PCC的优势比(OR)和99%可信区间(CrI),并对年龄、性别、种族、保险状况、收入中位数和合并症状况进行了调整。在符合纳入标准的739名患者中,尽管这些患者中有664名(90%)和75名(10%)分别在内科和外科服务中被确定需要PCC,但只有30%(n = 222)的患者接受了PCC。在接受PCC的222名患者中,214名(96%)由内科服务护理,8名(4%)由外科服务护理。主要由外科护理的患者接受PCC的可能性显著低于内科服务提供者的主要患者(OR,0.19,99% CrI,0.056 - 0.48)。在我们机构,许多适合PCC的外科患者由于会诊次数少而无法从这项服务中获益。有必要进一步调查其他机构是否也存在这种现象,阐明这种差异的原因,并制定干预措施以增加PCC在所有医学专业中的合理使用。