Melissa A LoPresti1, Fritz Dement2, Heather T Gold3. 1. Department of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA. 2. Department of Medical Library, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA. 3. Department of Population Health, New York University School of Medicine, New York, NY, USA heather.gold@nyumc.org.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Ethnic/racial minorities encounter disparities in healthcare, which may carry into end-of-life (EOL) care. Advanced cancer, highly prevalent and morbid, presents with worsening symptoms, heightening the need for supportive and EOL care. PURPOSE: To conduct a systematic review examining ethnic/racial disparities in EOL care for cancer patients. DESIGN: We searched four electronic databases for all original research examining EOL care use, preferences, and beliefs for cancer patients from ethnic/racial minority groups. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies were included: 20 quantitative and five qualitative. All had a full-text English language article and focused on the ethnic/racial minority groups of African Americans, Hispanics Americans, or Asian Americans. Key themes included EOL decision making processes, family involvement, provider communication, religion and spirituality, and patient preferences. Hospice was the most studied EOL care, and was most used among Whites, followed by use among Hispanics, and least used by African and Asian Americans. African Americans perceived a greater need for hospice, yet more frequently had inadequate knowledge. African Americans preferred aggressive treatment, yet EOL care provided was often inconsistent with preferences. Hispanics and African Americans less often documented advance care plans, citing religious coping and spirituality as factors. CONCLUSION: EOL care differences among ethnic/racial minority cancer patients were found in the processes, preferences, and beliefs regarding their care. Further steps are needed to explore the exact causes of differences, yet possible explanations include religious or cultural differences, caregiver respect for patient autonomy, access barriers, and knowledge of EOL care options.
BACKGROUND: Ethnic/racial minorities encounter disparities in healthcare, which may carry into end-of-life (EOL) care. Advanced cancer, highly prevalent and morbid, presents with worsening symptoms, heightening the need for supportive and EOL care. PURPOSE: To conduct a systematic review examining ethnic/racial disparities in EOL care for cancerpatients. DESIGN: We searched four electronic databases for all original research examining EOL care use, preferences, and beliefs for cancerpatients from ethnic/racial minority groups. RESULTS: Twenty-five studies were included: 20 quantitative and five qualitative. All had a full-text English language article and focused on the ethnic/racial minority groups of African Americans, Hispanics Americans, or Asian Americans. Key themes included EOL decision making processes, family involvement, provider communication, religion and spirituality, and patient preferences. Hospice was the most studied EOL care, and was most used among Whites, followed by use among Hispanics, and least used by African and Asian Americans. African Americans perceived a greater need for hospice, yet more frequently had inadequate knowledge. African Americans preferred aggressive treatment, yet EOL care provided was often inconsistent with preferences. Hispanics and African Americans less often documented advance care plans, citing religious coping and spirituality as factors. CONCLUSION: EOL care differences among ethnic/racial minority cancerpatients were found in the processes, preferences, and beliefs regarding their care. Further steps are needed to explore the exact causes of differences, yet possible explanations include religious or cultural differences, caregiver respect for patient autonomy, access barriers, and knowledge of EOL care options.
Authors: Sarah S Nouri; Deborah E Barnes; Aiesha M Volow; Ryan D McMahan; Margot Kushel; Chengshi Jin; John Boscardin; Rebecca L Sudore Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2019-08-19 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Joan Wasserman; Richard C Palmer; Marcia M Gomez; Rick Berzon; Said A Ibrahim; John Z Ayanian Journal: Am J Public Health Date: 2019-01 Impact factor: 9.308