OBJECTIVES: To compare the quality of end-of-life care of persons dying in regions of differing practice intensity. DESIGN: Mortality follow-back survey. SETTING: Geographic regions in the highest and lowest deciles of intensive care unit (ICU) use. PARTICIPANTS: Bereaved family member or other knowledgeable informants. MEASUREMENTS: Unmet needs, concerns, and rating of quality of end-of-life care in five domains (physical comfort and emotional support of the decedent, shared decision-making, treatment of the dying person with respect, providing information and emotional support to family members). RESULTS: Decedents in high- (n=365) and low-intensity (n=413) hospital service areas (HSAs) did not differ in age, sex, education, marital status, leading causes of death, or the degree to which death was expected, but those in the high-intensity ICU HSAs were more likely to be black and to live in nonrural areas. Respondents in high-intensity HSAs were more likely to report that care was of lower quality in each domain, and these differences were statistically significant in three of five domains. Respondents from high-intensity HSAs were more likely to report inadequate emotional support for the decedent (relative risk (RR)=1.2, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.0-1.4), concerns with shared decision-making (RR=1.8, 95% CI=1.0-2.9), inadequate information about what to expect (RR=1.5, 95% CI=1.3-1.8), and failure to treat the decedent with respect (RR=1.4, 95% CI=1.0-1.9). Overall ratings of the quality of end-of-life care were also significantly lower in high-intensity HSAs. CONCLUSION: Dying in regions with a higher use of ICU care is not associated with improved perceptions of quality of end-of-life care.
OBJECTIVES: To compare the quality of end-of-life care of persons dying in regions of differing practice intensity. DESIGN: Mortality follow-back survey. SETTING: Geographic regions in the highest and lowest deciles of intensive care unit (ICU) use. PARTICIPANTS: Bereaved family member or other knowledgeable informants. MEASUREMENTS: Unmet needs, concerns, and rating of quality of end-of-life care in five domains (physical comfort and emotional support of the decedent, shared decision-making, treatment of the dying person with respect, providing information and emotional support to family members). RESULTS: Decedents in high- (n=365) and low-intensity (n=413) hospital service areas (HSAs) did not differ in age, sex, education, marital status, leading causes of death, or the degree to which death was expected, but those in the high-intensity ICU HSAs were more likely to be black and to live in nonrural areas. Respondents in high-intensity HSAs were more likely to report that care was of lower quality in each domain, and these differences were statistically significant in three of five domains. Respondents from high-intensity HSAs were more likely to report inadequate emotional support for the decedent (relative risk (RR)=1.2, 95% confidence interval (CI)=1.0-1.4), concerns with shared decision-making (RR=1.8, 95% CI=1.0-2.9), inadequate information about what to expect (RR=1.5, 95% CI=1.3-1.8), and failure to treat the decedent with respect (RR=1.4, 95% CI=1.0-1.9). Overall ratings of the quality of end-of-life care were also significantly lower in high-intensity HSAs. CONCLUSION: Dying in regions with a higher use of ICU care is not associated with improved perceptions of quality of end-of-life care.
Authors: Amber E Barnato; M Brooke Herndon; Denise L Anthony; Patricia M Gallagher; Jonathan S Skinner; Julie P W Bynum; Elliott S Fisher Journal: Med Care Date: 2007-05 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Shubing Cai; Pedro L Gozalo; Susan L Mitchell; Sylvia Kuo; Julie P W Bynum; Vincent Mor; Joan M Teno Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2012-08-04 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Katherine A Ornstein; Melissa D Aldridge; Melissa M Garrido; Rebecca Gorges; Diane E Meier; Amy S Kelley Journal: JAMA Intern Med Date: 2015-07 Impact factor: 21.873
Authors: Robert Y Lee; Lyndia C Brumback; Seelwan Sathitratanacheewin; William B Lober; Matthew E Modes; Ylinne T Lynch; Corey I Ambrose; James Sibley; Kelly C Vranas; Donald R Sullivan; Ruth A Engelberg; J Randall Curtis; Erin K Kross Journal: JAMA Date: 2020-03-10 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Amy S Kelley; Partha Deb; Qingling Du; Melissa D Aldridge Carlson; R Sean Morrison Journal: Health Aff (Millwood) Date: 2013-03 Impact factor: 6.301