Patricia Kenny1, Deborah J Street2, Jane Hall2, Meera Agar3, Jane Phillips3. 1. Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation (CHERE), University of Technology Sydney, Broadway, PO Box 123, Sydney, NSW, 2007, Australia. patsy.kenny@chere.uts.edu.au. 2. Centre for Health Economics Research and Evaluation (CHERE), University of Technology Sydney, Broadway, PO Box 123, Sydney, NSW, 2007, Australia. 3. Improving Palliative, Aged and Chronic Care through Clinical Research and Translation (IMPACCT), University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Most health care systems are facing the challenge of providing health services to support the increasing numbers of older people with chronic life-limiting conditions at the end of life. Many policies focus primarily on increasing the proportion of deaths at home. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to investigate preferences for care throughout the latter stages of a life-limiting illness, particularly the importance of location of care, location of death, and the use of life-sustaining measures. It focuses on preferences for the care of an older person with advanced cancer in the last 3 weeks of life. METHODS: A survey using discrete choice experiment (DCE) methods was completed online by a general population sample of 1548 Australians aged 45 years and over. The experiment included 12 attributes, and each respondent completed 11 choice sets. Analysis was by a mixed logit model and latent class analysis (LCA). RESULTS: The most important attributes influencing care preferences were cost, patient anxiety, pain control, and carer stress (relative importance scores 0.21, 0.19, 0.14, and 0.14, respectively), with less importance given to place of care and place of death (relative importance scores 0.03 and 0.01). The model predicted that 42% would consider receiving most care in hospital better than at home (58%) holding the levels of other attributes constant across the alternatives, while 42% would consider death in hospital better than at home (58%). Three population segments with different preferences were identified by the LCA, the largest (46.5%) prioritised how the patient and carer felt as well as the pain control achieved, the next largest (28.1%) prioritised cost, and the smallest segment (25.4%) prioritised a single room when an inpatient. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that investment in services to support people at the end of life would be better targeted toward programmes that improve patient and carer wellbeing irrespective of the location of care and death.
BACKGROUND: Most health care systems are facing the challenge of providing health services to support the increasing numbers of older people with chronic life-limiting conditions at the end of life. Many policies focus primarily on increasing the proportion of deaths at home. OBJECTIVES: This study aims to investigate preferences for care throughout the latter stages of a life-limiting illness, particularly the importance of location of care, location of death, and the use of life-sustaining measures. It focuses on preferences for the care of an older person with advanced cancer in the last 3 weeks of life. METHODS: A survey using discrete choice experiment (DCE) methods was completed online by a general population sample of 1548 Australians aged 45 years and over. The experiment included 12 attributes, and each respondent completed 11 choice sets. Analysis was by a mixed logit model and latent class analysis (LCA). RESULTS: The most important attributes influencing care preferences were cost, patient anxiety, pain control, and carer stress (relative importance scores 0.21, 0.19, 0.14, and 0.14, respectively), with less importance given to place of care and place of death (relative importance scores 0.03 and 0.01). The model predicted that 42% would consider receiving most care in hospital better than at home (58%) holding the levels of other attributes constant across the alternatives, while 42% would consider death in hospital better than at home (58%). Three population segments with different preferences were identified by the LCA, the largest (46.5%) prioritised how the patient and carer felt as well as the pain control achieved, the next largest (28.1%) prioritised cost, and the smallest segment (25.4%) prioritised a single room when an inpatient. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows that investment in services to support people at the end of life would be better targeted toward programmes that improve patient and carer wellbeing irrespective of the location of care and death.
Authors: Benjamin Chastek; Carolyn Harley; Joel Kallich; Lee Newcomer; Carly J Paoli; April H Teitelbaum Journal: J Oncol Pract Date: 2012-07-03 Impact factor: 3.840
Authors: Irene J Higginson; Barbara A Daveson; R Sean Morrison; Deokhee Yi; Diane Meier; Melinda Smith; Karen Ryan; Regina McQuillan; Bridget M Johnston; Charles Normand Journal: BMC Geriatr Date: 2017-11-23 Impact factor: 3.921
Authors: J Russell Hoverman; B Brooke Mann; Sara Phu; Philip Nelson; Jad E Hayes; Cynthia B Taniguchi; Marcus A Neubauer Journal: Palliat Med Rep Date: 2020-06-25
Authors: Laura M Funk; Corey S Mackenzie; Maria Cherba; Nicole Del Rosario; Marian Krawczyk; Andrea Rounce; Kelli Stajduhar; S Robin Cohen Journal: BMC Palliat Care Date: 2022-08-01 Impact factor: 3.113