European journal of public health · 2023
Continuity of care and treatment intensity at the end of life in Swiss cancer patients.
СтатьяПоддержка исследования: вне правительства СШАНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Bähler Caroline, Näpflin Markus, Scherer Martin, Blozik Eva
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Continuity of care (COC) was shown to be associated with fewer hospitalizations. We aimed to evaluate whether COC was associated with intensive intervention(s) at the end of life (IEOL), a preference-sensitive outcome, in cancer patients.
METHODS: The study is based on claims data of patients with incident use of anti-neoplastics in Switzerland. COC Index, Usual Provider Continuity score, Sequential Continuity index and Modified Modified Continuity Index were calculated based on consultations with the usual ambulatory care physician. Treatment intensity was evaluated in the last 6 months of life, and COC was evaluated in months 18-6 before death in those who died between 24 and 54 months after incident cancer. IEOL comprised life-sustaining interventions (cardiac catheterization, cardiac assistance device implantation, pulmonary artery wedge monitoring, cardiopulmonary resuscitation/cardiac conversion, gastrostomy, blood transfusion, dialysis, mechanical ventilator utilization and intravenous antibiotics) and measures specifically used in cancer patients (last dose of chemotherapy ≤14 days of death, a new chemotherapy regimen starting <30 days before death, ≥1 emergency visit in the last month of life, ≥1 hospital admission or spending >14 days in hospital in the last month of life and death in an acute-care hospital).
RESULTS: All COC scores were inversely associated with the occurrence of an IEOL, as were older age, homecare nursing utilization and density of ambulatory care physicians. For COC Index, odds ratio was 0.55 (95% confidence interval 0.37-0.83).
CONCLUSIONS: COC scores were consistently and inversely related to IEOL. The study supports efforts to improve COC for cancer patients at their end of life.
METHODS: The study is based on claims data of patients with incident use of anti-neoplastics in Switzerland. COC Index, Usual Provider Continuity score, Sequential Continuity index and Modified Modified Continuity Index were calculated based on consultations with the usual ambulatory care physician. Treatment intensity was evaluated in the last 6 months of life, and COC was evaluated in months 18-6 before death in those who died between 24 and 54 months after incident cancer. IEOL comprised life-sustaining interventions (cardiac catheterization, cardiac assistance device implantation, pulmonary artery wedge monitoring, cardiopulmonary resuscitation/cardiac conversion, gastrostomy, blood transfusion, dialysis, mechanical ventilator utilization and intravenous antibiotics) and measures specifically used in cancer patients (last dose of chemotherapy ≤14 days of death, a new chemotherapy regimen starting <30 days before death, ≥1 emergency visit in the last month of life, ≥1 hospital admission or spending >14 days in hospital in the last month of life and death in an acute-care hospital).
RESULTS: All COC scores were inversely associated with the occurrence of an IEOL, as were older age, homecare nursing utilization and density of ambulatory care physicians. For COC Index, odds ratio was 0.55 (95% confidence interval 0.37-0.83).
CONCLUSIONS: COC scores were consistently and inversely related to IEOL. The study supports efforts to improve COC for cancer patients at their end of life.