4.0 Article

Palliative Care Use Among Patients With Solid Cancer Tumors: A National Cancer Data Base Study

期刊

JOURNAL OF PALLIATIVE CARE
卷 33, 期 3, 页码 149-158

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS INC
DOI: 10.1177/0825859718777320

关键词

National Cancer Data Base; palliative care; solid tumors; palliative care use in cancer; palliative care underutilization; retrospective studies

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Palliative care has been increasingly recognized as an important part of cancer care but remains underutilized in patients with solid cancers. There is a current gap in knowledge regarding why palliative care is underutilized nationwide. Objective: To identify the factors associated with palliative care use among deceased patients with solid cancer tumors. Methods: Using the 2016 National Cancer Data Base, we identified deceased patients (2004-2013) with breast, colon, lung, melanoma, and prostate cancer. Data were described as percentages. Associations between palliative care use and patient, facility, and geographic characteristics were evaluated through multivariate logistic regression. Results: A total of 1 840 111 patients were analyzed; 9.6% received palliative care. Palliative care use was higher in the following patient groups: survival >24 months (17% vs 2%), male (54% vs 46%), higher Charlson-Deyo comorbidity score (16% vs 8%), treatment at designated cancer programs (74% vs 71%), lung cancer (76% vs 28%), higher grade cancer (53% vs 24%), and stage IV cancer (59% vs 13%). Patients who lived in communities with a greater percentage of high school degrees had higher odds of receiving palliative care; Central and Pacific regions of the United States had lower odds of palliative care use than the East Coast. Patients with colon, melanoma, or prostate cancer had lower odds of palliative care than patients with breast cancer, whereas those with lung cancer had higher odds. Conclusions: Palliative care use in solid cancer tumors is variable, with a preference for patients with lung cancer, younger age, known insurance status, and higher educational level.

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

4.0
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