4.6 Article

Quality of end-of-life care in multiple myeloma: A 13-year analysis of a population-based cohort in Ontario, Canada

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF HAEMATOLOGY
卷 199, 期 5, 页码 688-695

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/bjh.18401

关键词

multiple myeloma; palliative care; quality of life; supportive care

资金

  1. Canadian Cancer Society Research Institute (CCSRI)
  2. Canadian Centre for Applied Research in Cancer Control (ARCC) [019789]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Optimizing end-of-life care for multiple myeloma is still needed. A study in Ontario, Canada analyzed an administrative cohort between 2006 and 2018, finding that many patients still receive aggressive care at the end of life, but the adoption of supportive care has increased. Age, income, and community size were identified as factors influencing the receipt of supportive care.
Optimizing end-of-life (EOL) care for multiple myeloma (MM) represents an unmet need. An administrative cohort in Ontario, Canada was analysed between 2006 and 2018. Aggressive care was defined as two or more emergency-department visits in the last 30 days before death, or at least two new hospitalizations within 30 days of death, or an intensive care unit (ICU) admission within the last 30 days of life. Supportive care was defined as a physician house-call in the last two weeks before death, or a palliative nursing or personal support visit at home in the last 30 days before death. Among 5095 patients, 23.2% of patients received chemotherapy at EOL and 55.6% of patients died as inpatient. A minority received aggressive care at EOL [28.3%: autologous stem cell transplant (ASCT), 20.4%: non-ASCT], and a majority received supportive care at EOL (65.4%: ASCT, 61.5%: non-ASCT). Supportive care was less likely to be received by those aged over 80 years and in lower-income neighbourhoods. Supportive care at EOL increased from 56.0% in 2006 to 70.3% in 2018. Despite improvements, many patients with MM experience aggressive care at EOL. Even in a publicly funded health care system, disparities based on age, income and community size are present.

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

4.6
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