Centre for Health Policy and Management, School of Medicine, Trinity College Dublin, Dublin, Ireland.
Social Research Division, Economic and Social Research Institute, Dublin, Ireland.
J Palliat Care. 2024 Jul;39(3):184-193. doi: 10.1177/08258597241231042. Epub 2024 Feb 25.
Congruence between the preferred and actual place of death is recognised as an important quality indicator in end-of-life care. However, there may be complexities about preferences that are ignored in summary congruence measures. This article examined factors associated with preferred place of death, actual place of death, and congruence for a sample of patients who had received specialist palliative care in the last three months of life in Ireland. This article analysed merged data from two previously published mortality follow-back surveys: Economic Evaluation of Palliative Care in Ireland (EEPCI); Irish component of International Access, Rights and Empowerment (IARE I). Logistic regression models examined factors associated with (a) preferences for home death versus institutional setting, (b) home death versus hospital death, and (c) congruent versus non-congruent death. Four regions with differing levels of specialist palliative care development in Ireland. Mean age 77, 50% female/male, 19% living alone, 64% main diagnosis cancer. Data collected 2011-2015, regression model sample sizes: n = 342-351. Congruence between preferred and actual place of death in the raw merged dataset was 51%. Patients living alone were significantly less likely to prefer home versus institution death (OR 0.389, 95%CI 0.157-0.961), less likely to die at home (OR 0.383, 95%CI 0.274-0.536), but had no significant association with congruence. The findings highlight the value in examining place of death preferences as well as congruence, because preferences may be influenced by what is feasible rather than what patients would like. The analyses also underline the importance of well-resourced community-based supports, including homecare, facilitating hospital discharge, and management of complex (eg, non-cancer) conditions, to facilitate patients to die in their preferred place.
在临终关怀中,人们认识到首选和实际死亡地点的一致性是一个重要的质量指标。然而,在总结一致性度量时,可能会忽略一些偏好的复杂性。本文调查了爱尔兰接受临终关怀专家护理的最后三个月的患者样本中,与首选死亡地点、实际死亡地点和一致性相关的因素。本文分析了之前发表的两项死亡率随访调查的合并数据:爱尔兰姑息治疗经济评估(EEPCI);国际准入、权利和赋权(IARE I)爱尔兰部分。逻辑回归模型考察了以下因素与(a)家庭死亡与机构设置、(b)家庭死亡与医院死亡和(c)一致与不一致死亡相关的因素。爱尔兰有四个具有不同水平的专科姑息治疗发展的地区。平均年龄为 77 岁,50%为女性/男性,19%独居,64%的主要诊断为癌症。数据收集时间为 2011-2015 年,回归模型样本量:n=342-351。原始合并数据集的首选与实际死亡地点的一致性为 51%。独居患者与机构相比,选择家庭死亡的可能性显著降低(OR 0.389,95%CI 0.157-0.961),在家中死亡的可能性也显著降低(OR 0.383,95%CI 0.274-0.536),但与一致性无显著关联。研究结果强调了检查死亡地点偏好以及一致性的重要性,因为偏好可能受到可行性的影响,而不是患者的喜好。分析还强调了资源充足的基于社区的支持的重要性,包括家庭护理、促进医院出院以及管理复杂(如非癌症)疾病,以促进患者在其首选地点死亡。
J Palliat Med. 2015-12
BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2019-3
Gesundheitswesen. 2013-12
Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2024-9
Int J Cardiol Cardiovasc Risk Prev. 2024-9-2
BMC Health Serv Res. 2024-7-23
BMC Palliat Care. 2022-8-30
Health Soc Care Community. 2022-11
HRB Open Res. 2021-10-4
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2022-4
Eur J Public Health. 2021-12-1
Front Psychol. 2021-8-27