4.3 Article

A population-level study of place of death and associated factors in Sweden

期刊

SCANDINAVIAN JOURNAL OF PUBLIC HEALTH
卷 43, 期 7, 页码 744-751

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1177/1403494815595774

关键词

Death certificates; health care disparities; palliative care; place of death; policy; population; public health; socioeconomic factors; Sweden

资金

  1. Erling Persson Family Foundation

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims: The aims of this study were to examine, on a population level, where people die in Sweden, and to investigate associations between place of death and underlying cause of death, socioeconomic and environmental characteristics, with a particular interest in people dying from life-limiting conditions typically in need of palliative care. Methods: This population-level study is based on death certificate data for all deceased individuals in Sweden in 2012, with a registered place of death (n=83,712). Multivariable logistic regression was performed to investigate associations between place of death and individual, socioeconomic and environmental characteristics. Results: The results show that, in 2012, 42.1% of all deaths occurred in hospitals, 17.8% occurred at home and 38.1% in nursing home facilities. Individuals dying of conditions indicative of potential palliative care needs were less likely to die in hospital than those dying of other conditions (OR = 0.73; 95% CI = 0.70-0.77). Living at home in urban areas was associated with higher likelihood of dying in hospital or in a nursing home (OR = 1.04 and 1.09 respectively). Educational attainment and marital status were found to be somewhat associated with the place of death. Conclusions: The majority of deaths in Sweden occur in institutional settings, with comparatively larger proportions of nursing home deaths than most countries. Associations between place of death and other variables point to inequalities in availability and/or utilization of health services at the end of life.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据