4.5 Article

Preference for Palliative Care in Cancer Patients: Are Men and Women Alike?

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2018.03.014

关键词

Palliative care; treatment preference; attitudes; gender differences; age; education; cancer; oncology

资金

  1. National Cancer Institute [R01CA140419, R01CA168387]
  2. Geriatric Scholars Award from the University of Rochester, Division of Geriatrics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Context. Men and those with low educational attainment are less likely to receive palliative care. Understanding these disparities is a high priority issue. Objectives. In this study of advanced cancer patients, we hypothesized that men and those with lower levels of educational attainment would have less favorable attitudes toward palliative care. Methods. We performed a cross-sectional analysis of data collected from 383 patients at study entry in the Values and Options in Cancer Care (VOICE) clinical trial. Patients were asked about their preferences for palliative care if their oncologist informed them that further treatment would not be helpful. Palliative care was defined as comfort care that focuses on quality of life, but not a cure. Response options were definitely no, possibly no, unsure, possibly yes, and definitely yes. Those preferring palliative care (definitely or possibly yes) were compared to all others. Predictors were patient gender and education level. Covariates included age, race, disease aggressiveness, and financial strain. Results. Women were more likely [odds ratio (95% CI)] than men to prefer palliative care [3.07 (1.80-5.23)]. The effect of education on preferences for palliative care was not statistically significant [0.85 (0.48-1.48)]. Conclusion. Significant gender differences in patients' preferences for palliative care could partially account for gender disparities in end-of-life care. Interventions to promote palliative care among men could reduce these disparities. (C) 2018 American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

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

4.5
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