Carr Deborah, Kalousova Lucie, Lin Katherine, Burgard Sarah
Boston University, 100 Cummington Mall, Boston, MA, 02215, USA.
University of California, Riverside, USA.
Soc Sci Med. 2021 Mar;272:113730. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.113730. Epub 2021 Feb 2.
Advance care planning (ACP) helps ensure that treatment preferences are met at the end of life. Medical professionals typically are responsible for facilitating patients' ACP, and may be especially effective in doing so if they have first-hand insights from their own planning. However, no large-scale U.S. studies examine whether persons working on the front lines of health care are more likely than other workers to have done ACP. We contrast the use of three ACP components (living wills, durable power of attorney for health care, and informal discussions) among persons working in medical, legal, social/health support services, other professional, and other non-professional occupations. Data are from the Health and Retirement Study (n = 7668) and Wisconsin Longitudinal Study (n = 5464). Multivariable logistic regression analyses are adjusted for socioeconomic, demographic, health, and psychosocial factors that may confound associations between occupational group and ACP. Medical professionals in both samples are more likely than other professional workers to discuss their own treatment preferences, net of all controls. Medical professionals in the WLS are more likely to execute living wills and DPAHC designations, whereas legal professionals in the HRS are more likely to name a DPAHC. Non-professional workers are significantly less likely to do all three types of planning, although these differences are accounted for by socioeconomic factors. Social and health services professionals are no more likely than other professionals to do ACP. The on-the-job experiences and expertise of medical professionals may motivate them to discuss their own end-of-life preferences, which may render them more trustworthy sources of information for patients and clients. The Affordable Care Act provides reimbursement for medical professionals' end-of-life consultations with Medicare beneficiary patients, yet practitioners uncomfortable with such conversations may fail to initiate them. Programs to increase medical professionals' own ACP may have the secondary benefit of increasing ACP among their patients.
生前预嘱规划(ACP)有助于确保在生命末期患者的治疗偏好得以实现。医疗专业人员通常负责推动患者进行生前预嘱规划,如果他们从自身规划中有第一手的见解,那么在这方面可能会特别有效。然而,美国没有大规模研究考察在医疗保健一线工作的人员是否比其他工作人员更有可能进行生前预嘱规划。我们对比了医疗、法律、社会/健康支持服务、其他专业和其他非专业职业的人员在生前预嘱规划的三个组成部分(生前遗嘱、医疗保健持久授权书和非正式讨论)的使用情况。数据来自健康与退休研究(n = 7668)和威斯康星纵向研究(n = 5464)。多变量逻辑回归分析针对可能混淆职业群体与生前预嘱规划之间关联的社会经济、人口统计学、健康和心理社会因素进行了调整。在所有对照因素的影响都被排除后,两个样本中的医疗专业人员都比其他专业工作人员更有可能讨论他们自己的治疗偏好。威斯康星纵向研究中的医疗专业人员更有可能立生前遗嘱和指定医疗保健持久授权书,而健康与退休研究中的法律专业人员更有可能指定医疗保健持久授权书。非专业工作人员进行所有三种类型规划的可能性显著更低,尽管这些差异可由社会经济因素来解释。社会和健康服务专业人员进行生前预嘱规划的可能性并不比其他专业人员更高。医疗专业人员的在职经历和专业知识可能促使他们讨论自己的临终偏好,这可能使他们成为患者和客户更值得信赖的信息来源。《平价医疗法案》为医疗专业人员与医疗保险受益患者进行临终咨询提供报销,但对这类谈话感到不自在的从业者可能不会主动开展。增加医疗专业人员自身生前预嘱规划的项目可能会带来额外好处,即增加他们患者的生前预嘱规划。