| Literature DB >> 35409955 |
Tomoyuki Ishibashi1, Kana Kazawa2, Yasmin Jahan1, Michiko Moriyama1.
Abstract
We aimed to clarify the regional cultural characteristics in areas with different death rates at home, and to identify factors that influence the discussion and documentation of end-of-life care (EOLC) among community-dwelling older adults. This study was a cross-sectional study using a self-administered questionnaire survey, and participants were Japanese older adults. A chi-square test and multiple regression analysis were conducted. Among the 227 respondents, 143 were analyzed. There were no statistical differences by area. Participants who had intentions to discuss EOLC tended to discuss EOLC with their families and family doctors and tended to create documents to show their wills on EOLC (p < 0.05). The following factors that influence the intentions to discuss EOLC were extracted: experience in providing EOLC; information on EOLC; having religious and spiritual beliefs, and not avoiding the subject of death as part of beliefs related to life and death. These results indicate that beliefs and intentions regarding EOLC may be similar across Japan. Moreover, our findings suggest that to increase the interest of older adults on EOLC, it is important to provide opportunities for older adults to share and discuss information about EOLC with healthcare professionals and others who have experience providing EOLC.Entities:
Keywords: decision-making; end-of-life care; older adults
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35409955 PMCID: PMC8998236 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19074273
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Figure 1Conceptual framework of this study.
Comparison between people who did not complete the questionnaire and people who completed the questionnaire.
| Factor | People Who Did Not Complete the Questionnaire | People Who Completed the Questionnaire | ||||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Hiroshima | Nagi | Hiroshima | Nagi | |||||||||
| All | Applicable | All | Applicable | All | Applicable | All | Applicable | |||||
| n | n | % | n | n | % | n | n | % | n | n | % | |
| Gender: Male | 29 | 8 | 27.6 | 26 | 5 | 19.2 | 82 | 21 | 25.6 | 61 | 15 | 24.6 |
| Age: years | 29 | 80.8 | ±6.7 | 26 | 82.0 | ±6.8 | 82 | 77.0 | ±5.7 | 61 | 76.0 | ±6.0 |
| Experience of life-threatening disease: Yes | 16 | 2 | 12.5 | 19 | 5 | 26.3 | 80 | 24 | 30 | 61 | 16 | 26.2 |
Comparisons between Hiroshima and Nagi.
|
|
|
| ||||||
|
|
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Gender: Male | 82 | 21 | 25.6 | 61 | 15 | 24.6 | 0.889 | a |
| Age: years (mean ± SD) | 82 | 77.0 | ±5.7 | 61 | 76.0 | ±6.0 | 0.290 | c |
| Behavioral Intention | 80 | 46 | 57.5 | 61 | 36 | 59.0 | 0.856 | a |
| Intention to discuss EOLC: Yes | ||||||||
| Behavioral outcome | ||||||||
| Discussed EOLC with their family: Yes | 80 | 40 | 50.0 | 61 | 27 | 44.3 | 0.723 | a |
| Discussed EOLC with family doctor: Yes | 82 | 9 | 11.0 | 60 | 6 | 10.0 | 0.540 | b |
| Created a document on EOLC: Yes | 81 | 6 | 7.4 | 59 | 6 | 10.2 | 0.389 | b |
| Social Support | ||||||||
| Having a family doctor: Yes | 81 | 75 | 92.6 | 61 | 53 | 86.9 | 0.259 | a |
| Support by health professionals: Yes | 79 | 22 | 27.8 | 60 | 20 | 33.3 | 0.485 | a |
| Support by family: Yes | 82 | 40 | 48.8 | 60 | 30 | 50.0 | 0.886 | a |
| Support by friend: Yes | 79 | 30 | 38.0 | 59 | 17 | 28.8 | 0.261 | a |
| Experience of life and disease | ||||||||
| Experience of a life-threatening disease: Yes | 80 | 24 | 30.0 | 61 | 16 | 26.2 | 0.623 | a |
| With an illness undergoing treatment: Yes | 81 | 51 | 63.0 | 60 | 45 | 75.0 | 0.130 | a |
| Having religious and spiritual belief: Yes | 81 | 29 | 35.8 | 61 | 16 | 26.2 | 0.225 | a |
| Experience in providing EOLC: Yes | 80 | 64 | 80.0 | 60 | 51 | 85.0 | 0.445 | a |
| Having media information on EOLC: Yes | 82 | 60 | 73.2 | 61 | 49 | 80.3 | 0.253 | a |
|
|
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
| |||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| ||
| Attitude towards behavior (Scale for beliefs about life and death): mean ± SD | ||||||||
| Views on life after death | 72 | 13.4 | ±5.4 | 54 | 13.1 | ±5.8 | 0.805 | c |
| Fear and anxiety for death | 72 | 14.4 | ±5.8 | 54 | 14.7 | ±6.5 | 0.800 | c |
| Death as liberation | 72 | 14.8 | ±6.4 | 54 | 14.5 | ±7.2 | 0.769 | c |
| Avoidance of death | 72 | 13.3 | ±5.2 | 54 | 13.1 | ±6.4 | 0.840 | c |
| A sense of purpose for life | 72 | 15.5 | ±4.6 | 54 | 14.2 | ±6.0 | 0.184 | c |
| Interest in death | 72 | 13.9 | ±5.6 | 54 | 14.6 | ±6.1 | 0.525 | c |
| Perceived life expectancy | 72 | 12.4 | ±4.6 | 54 | 11.6 | ±5.1 | 0.362 | c |
| A sense of behavioral control | ||||||||
| Many people in my community recognize home-based EOLC as natural practice: Yes | 77 | 9 | 11.7 | 56 | 12 | 21.4 | 0.152 | b |
| Home-based EOLC is burden for my family: Yes | 75 | 42 | 56.0 | 55 | 28 | 50.9 | 0.565 | b |
| Subjective norms (LOC score): mean ± SD | ||||||||
| Supernaturalism | 77 | 14.6 | ±3.9 | 55 | 13.8 | ±4.3 | 0.329 | c |
| Self | 77 | 24.4 | ±3.3 | 55 | 23.8 | ±3.1 | 0.297 | c |
| Coincidence | 77 | 16.9 | ±4.1 | 55 | 17.0 | ±5.1 | 0.849 | c |
| Family | 77 | 22.4 | ±3.8 | 55 | 22.3 | ±3.3 | 0.771 | c |
| Professionals | 77 | 20.0 | ±3.4 | 55 | 19.5 | ±4.4 | 0.429 | c |
Note. EOLC = end-of-life care; LOC = locus of control. Cronbach’s α for LOC score, scale for beliefs about life and death were 0.678, 0.751, respectively. a Pearson’s χ2 test; b Fisher’s exact test; c t-test.
The relationship between behavioral intention and behavioral outcome.
| Behavior Outcome | Analyzed Participants | Behavior Intention | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intention to Discuss EOLC | ||||||||
| Yes | No | |||||||
| n | % | n | % | |||||
| Discussed EOLC with their family | 139 | Yes | 60 | 43.2 | 6 | 4.3 | <0.001 | *** |
| No | 22 | 15.8 | 51 | 36.7 | ||||
| Discussed EOLC with family doctor | 140 | Yes | 14 | 10.0 | 1 | 0.7 | 0.004 | ** |
| No | 68 | 48.6 | 57 | 40.7 | ||||
| Created a document on EOLC | 138 | Yes | 11 | 8.0 | 1 | 0.7 | 0.015 | * |
| No | 70 | 50.7 | 56 | 40.6 | ||||
Note. EOLC = end-of-life care.. Fisher’s exact test. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01; *** p < 0.001.
Personal and sociodemographic factors that affect behavioral intention (intention to discuss EOLC).
| Factor | B | OR | 95%CI | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lower | Upper | |||||
| Having a family doctor | 1.660 | 5.259 | 0.717 | 38.568 | 0.103 | |
| Having religious and spiritual belief | 1.429 | 4.175 | 1.098 | 15.877 | 0.036 | * |
| Experience in providing EOLC | 2.369 | 10.682 | 2.299 | 49.636 | 0.003 | ** |
| Having media information on EOLC | 1.882 | 6.567 | 1.593 | 27.074 | 0.009 | ** |
| Beliefs about life and death | ||||||
| Views on life after death | −0.125 | 0.883 | 0.773 | 1.008 | 0.065 | |
| Avoidance of death | −0.191 | 0.526 | 0.728 | 0.938 | 0.003 | ** |
| Interest in death | 0.102 | 1.107 | 0.995 | 1.233 | 0.063 | |
| LOC | ||||||
| Supernaturalism | 0.174 | 1.190 | 0.988 | 1.433 | 0.067 | |
| Professionals | −0.150 | 0.861 | 0.719 | 1.233 | 0.102 | |
Note. B = 101; EOLC = end-of-life care; LOC = locus of control. The discriminant predictive value 56.4%. Hosmer–Lemeshow test p = 0.598. * p < 0.05; ** p < 0.01.