Advance Care Planning in Nursing Homes: Comparing Characteristics and Outcomes of Participants and Non-Participants.

Yi Zhou, Liyana Binte Zailan, Laurence Tan, Salina Yee Hung Annaliese Chung, Alecia Qin Ying Chua, Gerlie Contreras Magpantay, Lai Kiow Sim, Thilagavathy Muthusamy, James Alvin Low
{"title":"Advance Care Planning in Nursing Homes: Comparing Characteristics and Outcomes of Participants and Non-Participants.","authors":"Yi Zhou, Liyana Binte Zailan, Laurence Tan, Salina Yee Hung Annaliese Chung, Alecia Qin Ying Chua, Gerlie Contreras Magpantay, Lai Kiow Sim, Thilagavathy Muthusamy, James Alvin Low","doi":"10.1177/10499091241283399","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>There is an increasing need to integrate Advance Care Planning (ACP) in nursing homes (NH) due to rapid aging and burden of multimorbidity. This study examines differences in the characteristics and outcomes of NH residents enrolled in a palliative care programme who have completed ACP and those who did not.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of 294 deceased residents enrolled into a palliative programme from 8 nursing homes in Singapore. Comparison was made between residents who completed an ACP and those who did not. Treatment preferences and place of death preferences were examined and concordance to these preferences were analyzed.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>ACP completion rate was 81% in the cohort. Residents opting for comfort measures only had high concordance (92%) for their preferred place of death (PPOD). However, residents opting for limited intervention showed lower PPOD concordance (77%), with many dying in hospitals despite a preference for dying in the NH. Residents with ACP were significantly more likely to die in NH (68.2% vs. 36.4%) and had a longer median programme enrolment duration (131 vs. 53 days) compared to those who did not complete ACP.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Despite high ACP completion rate in our cohort, challenges remain in aligning treatment preferences with actual care provided, particularly for residents opting for limited intervention. Future efforts should focus on increasing ACP participation and addressing systemic barriers to improve end-of-life care outcomes for NH residents.</p>","PeriodicalId":94222,"journal":{"name":"The American journal of hospice & palliative care","volume":" ","pages":"10499091241283399"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The American journal of hospice & palliative care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10499091241283399","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: There is an increasing need to integrate Advance Care Planning (ACP) in nursing homes (NH) due to rapid aging and burden of multimorbidity. This study examines differences in the characteristics and outcomes of NH residents enrolled in a palliative care programme who have completed ACP and those who did not.

Method: We conducted a retrospective cohort analysis of 294 deceased residents enrolled into a palliative programme from 8 nursing homes in Singapore. Comparison was made between residents who completed an ACP and those who did not. Treatment preferences and place of death preferences were examined and concordance to these preferences were analyzed.

Results: ACP completion rate was 81% in the cohort. Residents opting for comfort measures only had high concordance (92%) for their preferred place of death (PPOD). However, residents opting for limited intervention showed lower PPOD concordance (77%), with many dying in hospitals despite a preference for dying in the NH. Residents with ACP were significantly more likely to die in NH (68.2% vs. 36.4%) and had a longer median programme enrolment duration (131 vs. 53 days) compared to those who did not complete ACP.

Conclusion: Despite high ACP completion rate in our cohort, challenges remain in aligning treatment preferences with actual care provided, particularly for residents opting for limited intervention. Future efforts should focus on increasing ACP participation and addressing systemic barriers to improve end-of-life care outcomes for NH residents.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
养老院的预先护理计划:比较参与者和非参与者的特征和结果。
背景:由于快速老龄化和多病负担,在养老院整合预先护理规划(ACP)的需求日益增加。本研究探讨了参加姑息关怀项目并完成 ACP 的疗养院居民与未完成 ACP 的疗养院居民在特征和预后方面的差异:我们对新加坡 8 家疗养院中参加姑息关怀项目的 294 名已故住院者进行了回顾性队列分析。我们对完成 ACP 和未完成 ACP 的住院者进行了比较。对治疗偏好和死亡地点偏好进行了研究,并对这些偏好的一致性进行了分析:结果:ACP 的完成率为 81%。选择舒适措施的住院患者仅在首选死亡地点(PPOD)方面有较高的一致性(92%)。然而,选择有限干预的住院患者的 PPOD 一致性较低(77%),尽管他们更愿意在 NH 死亡,但仍有许多人在医院死亡。与未完成ACP的住院医师相比,完成ACP的住院医师在NH死亡的几率明显更高(68.2%对36.4%),而且参与计划的中位时间更长(131天对53天):尽管我们队列中的 ACP 完成率较高,但在将治疗偏好与实际提供的护理相协调方面仍存在挑战,尤其是对于选择有限干预的居民而言。未来的工作重点应放在提高 ACP 的参与率和解决系统性障碍上,以改善 NH 居民的临终关怀结果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Knowledge and Attitude of the General Public Toward Palliative Care in Jordan: A Cross-Sectional Study. Differences in Attitudes and Barriers Towards Advance Care Planning Amongst Ischemic Heart Disease Patients: A Cross-Sectional Study. A Mixed Methods Analysis of Standardized Documentation of Serious Illness Conversations Within an Electronic Health Record Module During Hospitalization. Palliative and End-of-Life Care Interventions with Minoritized Populations in the US with Serious Illness: A Scoping Review. Exploring Palliative Care Needs Among Patients With Cancer and Non-Cancer Serious Chronic Diseases: A Comparison Study.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1