Division of Critical Care Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Lurie Children's Hospital and Northwestern University, Chicago, IL.
Division of General Pediatrics, Department of Pediatrics, University of Washington School of Medicine, Seattle, WA; Center for Child Health, Behavior and Development, Seattle Children's Research Institute, Seattle, WA.
J Pediatr. 2023 Jul;258:113415. doi: 10.1016/j.jpeds.2023.113415. Epub 2023 Apr 6.
To identify sociodemographic factors associated with pediatric clinical ethics consultation (CEC).
Matched, case-control study at a single center, tertiary pediatric hospital in the Pacific Northwest. Cases (patients hospitalized January 2008-December 2019 with CEC) were compared with controls (those without CEC). We determined the association of the outcome (CEC receipt) with exposures (race/ethnicity, insurance status, and language for care) using univariate and multivariable conditional logistic regression.
Of 209 cases and 836 matched controls, most cases identified as white (42%), had public/no insurance (66%), and were English-speaking (81%); most controls identified as white (53%), had private insurance (54%), and were English-speaking (90%). In univariate analysis, patients identifying as Black (OR: 2.79, 95% CI: 1.57, 4.95; P < .001), Hispanic (OR: 1.92, 95% CI: 1.24, 2.97; P = .003), with public/no insurance (OR: 2.21, 95% CI: 1.58, 3.10; P < .001), and using Spanish language for care (OR: 2.52, 95% CI: 1.47, 4.32; P < .001) had significantly increased odds of CEC, compared with patients identifying as white, using private insurance, and using English for care, respectively. In multivariable regression, Black race (adjusted OR: 2.12, 95% CI: 1.16, 3.87; P = .014) and public/no insurance (adjusted OR: 1.81, 95% CI: 1.22, 2.68; P = .003) remained significantly associated with receipt of CEC.
We found disparities in receipt of CEC by race and insurance status. Further study is needed to determine the causes of these disparities.
确定与儿科临床伦理咨询(CEC)相关的社会人口学因素。
在太平洋西北地区的一家三级儿科医院进行了单中心匹配病例对照研究。病例组(2008 年 1 月至 2019 年 12 月期间接受 CEC 的住院患者)与对照组(未接受 CEC 的患者)进行了比较。我们使用单变量和多变量条件逻辑回归来确定结果(CEC 接受)与暴露(种族/民族、保险状况和护理语言)之间的关联。
在 209 例病例和 836 例匹配的对照中,大多数病例被认定为白人(42%),有公共/无保险(66%),并且会讲英语(81%);大多数对照者被认定为白人(53%),有私人保险(54%),并且会讲英语(90%)。在单变量分析中,被认定为黑人(OR:2.79,95%CI:1.57,4.95;P<0.001)、西班牙裔(OR:1.92,95%CI:1.24,2.97;P=0.003)、有公共/无保险(OR:2.21,95%CI:1.58,3.10;P<0.001)和使用西班牙语进行护理(OR:2.52,95%CI:1.47,4.32;P<0.001)的患者与分别认定为白人、使用私人保险和使用英语护理的患者相比,CEC 的可能性显著增加。在多变量回归中,黑人种族(调整后的 OR:2.12,95%CI:1.16,3.87;P=0.014)和公共/无保险(调整后的 OR:1.81,95%CI:1.22,2.68;P=0.003)仍然与接受 CEC 显著相关。
我们发现 CEC 的接受率存在种族和保险状况的差异。需要进一步研究以确定这些差异的原因。