| Literature DB >> 34065678 |
Daniel Puente-Fernández1, Rosel Jimeno-Ucles2, Emilio Mota-Romero3, Concepción Roldán4, Katherine Froggatt5, Rafael Montoya-Juárez6.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is a need for instruments that can evaluate the psychosocial quality of dying in nursing homes. The aim of this study was to adapt and validate the Quality of Dying in Long-Term Care scale (QoD-LTC) to the Spanish context.Entities:
Keywords: long-term care; nursing homes; palliative care; quality indicators; quality of health care; terminal care
Year: 2021 PMID: 34065678 PMCID: PMC8156125 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph18105287
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Changes proposed by the experts for the items of the QoD-LTC scale.
| Original | Adaptation. |
|---|---|
| [RESIDENT] had treatment preferences in writing. | [Resident] communicated their preferences with respect to treatment. |
| [RESIDENT] had named a decision-maker in the event that [HE/SHE] was no longer able to make decisions. | Someone was designated to make decisions in their place [Resident] in the case that they could no longer do so. |
| [RESIDENT] had funeral arrangements planned. | [Resident] expressed how they wanted their funeral and/or other matters concerning their body to be after their death |
ESCALA -QoD-LTC.
| Ítem ¿Cómo de Cierto es Que (el Paciente)…? | Para Nada/ | Completamente/ | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Se mantuvo aseado. | |||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 2 | Se le proporcionó un contacto físico cariñoso todos los días. | |||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 3 | Se preservó su dignidad. | |||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 4 | Su médico lo trato de forma integral, atendiendo a todas sus facetas. | |||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 5 | Tenía un enfermero o auxiliar con quien se sentía cómodo. | |||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 6 | Mantuvo el sentido del humor que lo caracterizaba. | |||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 7 | Expresó que estaba preparado para morir. | |||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 8 | Parecía estar en paz. | |||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 9 | Comunicó sus preferencias con respecto al tratamiento. | |||||||||||
| [ | ||||||||||||
| 10 | Se nombró a alguien que tomara las decisiones en su lugar en caso de que ya no pudiera. | |||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
| 11 | Expresó como quería que fuera su funeral y/o otras cuestiones relativas a su cuerpo después de su fallecimiento. | |||||||||||
|
| ||||||||||||
The background colour of the table is where the participants should mark the point where the answer is located.
Sociodemographic and clinical characteristics of the residents.
| Variables | Total Sample | |
|---|---|---|
| Age, M (SD) | 87.62 | (11.56) |
| Female, | 91 | (59.5) |
| Marital status widower, | 92 | (60.7) |
| Place of death | ||
| Home, | 1 | (7) |
| Hospital, | 64 | (41.8) |
| Nursing-Home, | 88 | (57.5) |
| Coexisting conditions | ||
| Oncologic disease, | 26 | (17) |
| Chronic lung disease | 22 | (14.4) |
| Chronic heart disease | 61 | (39.9) |
| Dementia | 84 | (54.9) |
| Vascular neurological disease | 31 | (20.3) |
| Degenerative neurological disease | 21 | (13.7) |
| Chronic liver disease | 2 | (1.3) |
| Chronic kidney failure | 19 | (12.4) |
Factorial load of the QoD-LTC scale adapted to the Spanish context.
| Items | Factor 1. Quality of Care | Factor 2. End-of-Life Communication by the Resident | Factor 3. End-of-Life Appearance |
|---|---|---|---|
| [RESIDENT] received compassionate physical touch daily. |
| −0.154 | 0.351 |
| [RESIDENT’s] dignity was maintained. |
| 0.074 | 0.136 |
| [RESIDENT’s] physician knew [HIM/HER] as a whole person. |
| −0.177 | 0.096 |
| There was a nurse or aide with whom [RESIDENT] felt comfortable. |
| 0.136 | 0.020 |
| Someone was designated to make decisions in their place [Resident] in the case that they could no longer do so. |
| 0.100 | 0.082 |
| [RESIDENT] indicated [HE/SHE] was prepared to die. | −0.182 |
| 0.178 |
| [Resident] communicated their preferences with respect to treatment. | 0.094 |
| 0.085 |
| [Resident] expressed how they wanted their funeral and/or other matters concerning their body to be after their death. | 0.258 |
| −0.419 |
| [RESIDENT] was kept clean. | 0.362 | −0.094 |
|
| [RESIDENT] was able to retain [HIS/HER] sense of humor. | 0.085 | 0.333 |
|
| [HE/SHE] appeared to be at peace. | 0.316 | 0.113 |
|
The extraction was based on Principal Component Analysis using the Varimax rotation method with Kaiser normalization. Bold font indicates the factor loading of the item on the factor to which it was assigned.
Results of intra- and inter-observer variability.
| Items | Intra-Observer ( | Inter-Observer ( | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ICC |
| ICC |
| |
| [RESIDENT] was kept clean. | 0.588 ** | 0.002 | 0.371 * | 0.033 |
| [RESIDENT] received compassionate physical touch daily. | 0.755 *** | 0.000 | 0.637 ** | 0.000 |
| [RESIDENT’s] dignity was maintained. | 0.672 ** | 0.000 | 0.404 * | 0.022 |
| [RESIDENT’s] physician knew [HIM/HER] as a whole person. | 0.714 ** | 0.000 | 0.548 * | 0.001 |
| There was a nurse or aide with whom [RESIDENT] felt comfortable. | 0.440 * | 0.027 | 0.741 ** | 0.000 |
| [RESIDENT] was able to retain [HIS/HER] sense of humor. | 0.615 ** | 0.000 | 0.773 *** | 0.000 |
| [RESIDENT] indicated [HE/SHE] was prepared to die. | 0.758 *** | 0.000 | 0.660 ** | 0.000 |
| [HE/SHE] appeared to be at peace. | 0.411 * | 0.040 | 0.421 * | 0.015 |
| [Resident] communicated their preferences with respect to treatment. | 0.726 ** | 0.000 | 0.823 *** | 0.000 |
| Someone was designated to make decisions in their place [Resident] in the case that they could no longer do so. | 0.633 ** | 0.026 | 0.837 *** | 0.000 |
| [Resident] expressed how they wanted their funeral and/or other matters concerning their body to be after their death. | 0.915 **** | 0.000 | 0.787 *** | 0.001 |
ICC: Intraclass Correlation Coefficient. * poor agreement, ** moderate agreement, *** good agreement, **** excellent agreement.
Convergent validity of the QoD-LTC scale.
| Scales | ECOG | ESAS | IPOS | Mono-Item | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| r |
| r |
| r |
| r |
| ||
| QoD-LTC | Total score | −0.321 * | 0.000 | −0.153 | 0.067 | −0.252 * | 0.002 | 0.322 * | 0.000 |
| Factor 1 | −0.157 | 0.120 | −0.237 * | 0.004 | −0.303 * | 0.000 | 0.210* | 0.010 | |
| Factor 2 | −0.190 * | 0.019 | 0.272 * | 0.001 | 0.232 * | 0.005 | 0.235 * | 0.004 | |
| Factor 3 | −0.292 * | 0.000 | −0.198 * | 0.017 | −0.298 * | 0.000 | 0.270 * | 0.001 | |
ECOG: Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group Scale of Performance Status; ESAS: Edmonton Symptom Assessment System; IPOS: Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale. Mono-item: Quality of dying during the last month; QoD-LTC: Quality of Dying in Long-Term Care. r = Spearman’s rho; * = weak correlation. p = p value.