Literature DB >> 12183092

A measure of the quality of dying and death. Initial validation using after-death interviews with family members.

J Randall Curtis1, Donald L Patrick, Ruth A Engelberg, Kaye Norris, Charles Asp, Ira Byock.   

Abstract

A reliable and valid measure of the quality of the dying experience would help clinicians and researchers improve care for dying patients. To describe the validity of an instrument assessing the quality of dying and death using the perspective of family members after death and to identify clinical correlates of a high quality death, a retrospective cohort study evaluated the 31-item Quality of Dying and Death (QODD) questionnaire. The questionnaire was administered to family members of patients who died in Missoula county Montana in 1996 and 1997. The interview included questions assessing symptoms, patient preferences, and satisfaction with care. Measurement validity was examined for item and total scores and reliability analyses for the QODD total score were assessed. Construct validity was assessed using measures of concepts hypothesized to be associated with the quality of dying and death. There were 935 deaths, of which 252 (27.0%) family interviews were represented. Non-enrolled decedents were not significantly different from enrolled decedents on age, sex, cause of death, or location of death. We excluded sudden deaths (n = 45) and decedents under age 18 (n = 2), leaving 205 after-death interviews. A total QODD score, on a scale from 0 to 100 with higher scores indicating better quality, ranged from 26.0 to 99.6, with a mean of 67.4 and Cronbach's alpha of 0.89. The total QODD score was not associated with patient age, sex, education, marital status, or income. As hypothesized, higher QODD scores were significantly associated with death at home (P < 0.01), death in the location the patient desired (P < 0.01), lower symptom burden (P < 0.001), and better ratings of symptom treatment (P< 0.01). Although the total score was not associated with the presence of an advance directive, higher scores were associated with communication about treatment preferences (P < 0.01), compliance with treatment preferences (P < 0.001), and family satisfaction regarding communication with the health care team (P < 0.01). Availability of a health care team member at night or on weekends was also associated with a higher QODD score (P < 0.001). The QODD total score demonstrated good cross-sectional validity. Clinicians caring for dying patients should focus on improving communication with the patient and family and improving symptom assessment and treatment. Health care teams should focus on continuity of care, including having a team member familiar with the patient available for calls at nights and on weekends. Future work will assess the potential role of the QODD in improving the quality of the dying experience.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12183092     DOI: 10.1016/s0885-3924(02)00419-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage        ISSN: 0885-3924            Impact factor:   3.612


  100 in total

1.  Identifying elements of ICU care that families report as important but unsatisfactory: decision-making, control, and ICU atmosphere.

Authors:  Tristan R Osborn; J Randall Curtis; Elizabeth L Nielsen; Anthony L Back; Sarah E Shannon; Ruth A Engelberg
Journal:  Chest       Date:  2012-11       Impact factor: 9.410

2.  Defining priorities for improving end-of-life care in Canada.

Authors:  Daren K Heyland; Deborah J Cook; Graeme M Rocker; Peter M Dodek; Demetrios J Kutsogiannis; Yoanna Skrobik; Xuran Jiang; Andrew G Day; S Robin Cohen
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2010-10-04       Impact factor: 8.262

Review 3.  Parental bereavement needs in the pediatric intensive care unit: review of available measures.

Authors:  Kathleen L Meert; Stephanie Myers Schim; Sherylyn H Briller
Journal:  J Palliat Med       Date:  2011-06-01       Impact factor: 2.947

4.  Development and evaluation of an interprofessional communication intervention to improve family outcomes in the ICU.

Authors:  J Randall Curtis; Paul S Ciechanowski; Lois Downey; Julia Gold; Elizabeth L Nielsen; Sarah E Shannon; Patsy D Treece; Jessica P Young; Ruth A Engelberg
Journal:  Contemp Clin Trials       Date:  2012-07-06       Impact factor: 2.226

5.  Factors important to patients' quality of life at the end of life.

Authors:  Baohui Zhang; Matthew E Nilsson; Holly G Prigerson
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2012-08-13

Review 6.  Update in hospice and palliative care.

Authors:  Katherine A Roza; Jay R Horton; Kimberly Johnson; Wendy G Anderson
Journal:  J Palliat Med       Date:  2014-02-18       Impact factor: 2.947

7.  "You can't always get what you want"--or can you?

Authors:  Joan M Teno; David Dosa
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2006-02-28       Impact factor: 8.262

8.  Clinical trial participation as part of end-of-life cancer care: associations with medical care and quality of life near death.

Authors:  Andrea C Enzinger; Baohui Zhang; Jane C Weeks; Holly G Prigerson
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2013-10-05       Impact factor: 3.612

9.  CAESAR: a new tool to assess relatives' experience of dying and death in the ICU.

Authors:  Nancy Kentish-Barnes; Valérie Seegers; Stéphane Legriel; Alain Cariou; Samir Jaber; Jean-Yves Lefrant; Bernard Floccard; Anne Renault; Isabelle Vinatier; Armelle Mathonnet; Danielle Reuter; Olivier Guisset; Christophe Cracco; Amélie Seguin; Jacques Durand-Gasselin; Béatrice Éon; Marina Thirion; Jean-Philippe Rigaud; Bénédicte Philippon-Jouve; Laurent Argaud; Renaud Chouquer; Mélanie Adda; Laurent Papazian; Céline Dedrie; Hugues Georges; Eddy Lebas; Nathalie Rolin; Pierre-Edouard Bollaert; Lucien Lecuyer; Gérald Viquesnel; Marc Léone; Ludivine Chalumeau-Lemoine; Zoé Cohen-Solal; Maité Garrouste-Orgeas; Fabienne Tamion; Bruno Falissard; Sylvie Chevret; Elie Azoulay
Journal:  Intensive Care Med       Date:  2016-03-07       Impact factor: 17.440

10.  Measuring patient satisfaction in oncology palliative care: psychometric properties of the FAMCARE-patient scale.

Authors:  Christopher Lo; Debika Burman; Gary Rodin; Camilla Zimmermann
Journal:  Qual Life Res       Date:  2009-06-10       Impact factor: 4.147

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.