Winogora Victoria M, DeForge Christine E, Grier Kimberlee, Stone Patricia W
Columbia University School of Nursing, New York, NY, USA.
Columbia University School of Nursing, New York, NY, USA.
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2025 Jun;26(6):105578. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2025.105578. Epub 2025 Apr 9.
To systematically review the evidence on live hospice discharge for individuals with cognitive disabilities.
Systematic review.
Adults with cognitive disabilities enrolled in hospice in the United States.
Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, we searched for US-based, English-language, and peer-reviewed literature focused on live discharges from hospice for individuals with cognitive disabilities. We searched PubMed, CINAHL, and Web of Science for articles published between January 1, 2014, through August 1, 2024. We used the Joanna Briggs Institute Analytical Cross-Sectional Studies Appraisal Tool to assess study quality.
After screening 1543 titles and abstracts, we completed a full-text review of 30 articles, of which 8 met inclusion criteria. All included studies were cross-sectional analyses. The indications of cognitive disability varied (ie, dementia diagnosis, positive result on cognitive function assessment), but there were no studies focused on individuals with acquired brain injuries or intellectual and developmental disabilities, nor was the term cognitive disability used in any of the studies. In all studies, the indicator of cognitive disability was associated with live hospice discharge. Other risk factors included female sex (n = 4), minoritized race (n = 4), for-profit hospice ownership (n = 4), and delivery of hospice services at home (n = 2). In all studies, researchers found that individuals with cognitive disabilities had longer hospice lengths of stay.
This systematic review is the first to focus on live discharge from hospice for individuals with cognitive disabilities. All studies focused exclusively on individuals with dementias. Although the term cognitive disability was absent from the literature reviewed, cognitive disability was associated with live discharge. Future research should aim to include the greater cognitive disability community to assess hospice and other end-of-life outcomes to identify potential targets for future intervention.
系统回顾有关认知障碍患者临终关怀出院的证据。
系统回顾。
美国接受临终关怀的成年认知障碍患者。
按照系统评价与Meta分析的首选报告项目(PRISMA)指南,我们搜索了以美国为基础、英文且经同行评审的文献,这些文献聚焦于认知障碍患者的临终关怀出院情况。我们在PubMed、CINAHL和科学网中搜索了2014年1月1日至2024年8月1日发表的文章。我们使用乔安娜·布里格斯研究所横断面研究评估工具来评估研究质量。
在筛选了1543篇标题和摘要后,我们对30篇文章进行了全文审查,其中8篇符合纳入标准。所有纳入研究均为横断面分析。认知障碍的指征各不相同(即痴呆诊断、认知功能评估呈阳性结果),但没有研究聚焦于后天性脑损伤或智力与发育障碍患者,且所有研究均未使用认知障碍这一术语。在所有研究中,认知障碍指标与临终关怀出院相关。其他风险因素包括女性(n = 4)、少数族裔(n = 4)、营利性临终关怀机构所有权(n = 4)以及在家接受临终关怀服务(n = 2)。在所有研究中,研究人员发现认知障碍患者的临终关怀住院时间更长。
本系统回顾首次聚焦于认知障碍患者的临终关怀出院情况。所有研究均仅关注痴呆患者。尽管在所审查的文献中未出现认知障碍这一术语,但认知障碍与出院相关。未来的研究应旨在纳入更广泛的认知障碍群体,以评估临终关怀及其他临终结局,从而确定未来干预的潜在目标。