Philip C Higgins1, Melissa M Garrido2,3, Holly G Prigerson4. 1. 1 Brigham & Women's Hospital and the Dana-Farber/Brigham & Women's Cancer Center , Boston, Massachusetts. 2. 2 James J Peters Veterans Affairs Medical Center , Bronx, New York. 3. 3 Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai , New York, New York. 4. 4 Center for Research on End-of-Life Care, Weill Cornell Medical College , New York, New York.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Cancer caregivers are key stakeholders in the final weeks of life and in bereavement. Research has highlighted end-of-life (EOL) factors important to caregivers, as well as factors contributing to caregiver mental health and bereavement outcomes. There has been limited data on factors predicting caregiver perceptions of quality of EOL care. OBJECTIVE: This study's purpose was to identify modifiable predictors of caregivers' Caregiver Evaluation of Quality of End of Life Care (CEQUEL) scores, with the broader aim of informing clinical interventions to improve caregiver impressions of care and subsequent bereavement adjustment. METHODS: Study data came from Coping with Cancer I (CwC1). CwC1 investigators interviewed advanced cancer patients and caregivers prior to the patient's death (Wave 1) and reinterviewed caregivers following the death (Wave 2) (N=275 dyads). The authors identified potential Wave 1 predictors of CEQUEL scores and performed a series of linear regression analyses to identify a parsimonious predictive model using corrected Akaike's Information Criterion (AICc) values. RESULTS: In adjusted analyses, caregivers rated quality of care as poorer when patients died in a hospital (B=-1.40, SE=0.40, p=0.001) (B, unstandardized regression coefficient; SE, standard error) or had less than one week of inpatient hospice care (B=-1.98, SE=-0.70, p=0.006). Whole-person physician care and caregiver religiosity were associated with perceived higher quality of care in unadjusted, but not adjusted, analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that place of death and hospice length of stay best predict bereaved caregiver evaluations of quality of EOL care. These findings equip health care providers with modifiable targets to improve caregivers' experience of EOL care and subsequent bereavement.
BACKGROUND:Cancer caregivers are key stakeholders in the final weeks of life and in bereavement. Research has highlighted end-of-life (EOL) factors important to caregivers, as well as factors contributing to caregiver mental health and bereavement outcomes. There has been limited data on factors predicting caregiver perceptions of quality of EOL care. OBJECTIVE: This study's purpose was to identify modifiable predictors of caregivers' Caregiver Evaluation of Quality of End of Life Care (CEQUEL) scores, with the broader aim of informing clinical interventions to improve caregiver impressions of care and subsequent bereavement adjustment. METHODS: Study data came from Coping with Cancer I (CwC1). CwC1 investigators interviewed advanced cancerpatients and caregivers prior to the patient's death (Wave 1) and reinterviewed caregivers following the death (Wave 2) (N=275 dyads). The authors identified potential Wave 1 predictors of CEQUEL scores and performed a series of linear regression analyses to identify a parsimonious predictive model using corrected Akaike's Information Criterion (AICc) values. RESULTS: In adjusted analyses, caregivers rated quality of care as poorer when patients died in a hospital (B=-1.40, SE=0.40, p=0.001) (B, unstandardized regression coefficient; SE, standard error) or had less than one week of inpatient hospice care (B=-1.98, SE=-0.70, p=0.006). Whole-person physician care and caregiver religiosity were associated with perceived higher quality of care in unadjusted, but not adjusted, analyses. CONCLUSIONS: Findings suggest that place of death and hospice length of stay best predict bereaved caregiver evaluations of quality of EOL care. These findings equip health care providers with modifiable targets to improve caregivers' experience of EOL care and subsequent bereavement.
Authors: Elizabeth H Bradley; Holly Prigerson; Melissa D A Carlson; Emily Cherlin; R Johnson-Hurzeler; Stanislav V Kasl Journal: Am J Psychiatry Date: 2004-12 Impact factor: 18.112
Authors: Emily J Cherlin; Colleen L Barry; Holly G Prigerson; Dena Schulman Green; Rosemary Johnson-Hurzeler; Stanislav V Kasl; Elizabeth H Bradley Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2007-02 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Sean O' Mahony; Arthur Blank; Janice Simpson; Judy Persaud; Bernadette Huvane; Susan McAllen; Michelle Davitt; Marlene McHugh; Allen Hutcheson; Serife Karakas; Philip Higgins; Peter Selwyn Journal: J Urban Health Date: 2008-05 Impact factor: 3.671
Authors: Margaret F Clayton; Jennifer Hulett; Kirandeep Kaur; Maija Reblin; Andrew Wilson; Lee Ellington Journal: Oncol Nurs Forum Date: 2017-07-01 Impact factor: 2.172
Authors: Paul R Duberstein; Michael Chen; Michael Hoerger; Ronald M Epstein; Laura M Perry; Sule Yilmaz; Fahad Saeed; Supriya G Mohile; Sally A Norton Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2019-10-19 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: J Nicholas Dionne-Odom; Andres Azuero; Kathleen D Lyons; Jay G Hull; Anna T Prescott; Tor Tosteson; Jennifer Frost; Konstantin H Dragnev; Marie A Bakitas Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2016-06-03 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Wendy G Lichtenthal; Martin Viola; Madeline Rogers; Kailey E Roberts; Lindsay Lief; Christopher E Cox; Chris R Brewin; Jiehui Cici Xu; Paul K Maciejewski; Cynthia X Pan; Taylor Coats; Daniel J Ouyang; Shayna Rabin; Susan C Vaughan; William Breitbart; Marjorie E Marenberg; Holly G Prigerson Journal: Palliat Support Care Date: 2022-04