Delivery of Palliative Care in the Last Year of Life to Individuals Receiving Maintenance Dialysis: A Population-Level Cross-Sectional Study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
RATIONALE & OBJECTIVE: Little is known about physician-delivered palliative care and the sociodemographic and clinical factors associated with its utilization for individuals undergoing maintenance dialysis. This study described physician-delivered palliative care in the last year of life and evaluated the factors associated with its use in this patient population. STUDY DESIGN: Population-level cross-sectional study. SETTING & PARTICIPANTS: Individuals undergoing maintenance dialysis who died between April 2012 and March 2020 in Ontario, Canada. EXPOSURE: Sociodemographic factors (age, sex, immigration status, neighborhood-level income quintile, rurality, health region), comorbidities (heart failure, cirrhosis, pulmonary disease, dementia, malignancy), and kidney-specific factors (dialysis modality, access, duration; and prior kidney transplantation). OUTCOME: Physician-delivered palliative care. ANALYTICAL APPROACH: Descriptive statistics characterizing physician-delivered palliative care. Logistic regression evaluating the factors associated with utilization. RESULTS: The study included 18,452 decedents who underwent maintenance dialysis (median age, 71 years; 61.1% male). Of these decedents, 52.2% received physician-delivered palliative care in the last year of life starting a median of 23 days before death; 65% died in the hospital, and 12% at home. Palliative care was initiated by a family physician for 68% of those receiving physician-delivered palliative care. It was delivered in the clinic setting for 44.8% and through a generalist-only model for 46%. The odds of receiving palliative care were higher in the setting of a malignancy, dementia, or cirrhosis and were lower among those who were recent immigrants, lived in lower-income neighborhoods, and resided in less dense/more rural regions. The odds of dying in a hospital were lower among those who received palliative care, especially if it was delivered at home. LIMITATIONS: Exclusion of palliative care provided by non-physician providers and inability to infer causal associations or to comment on the goal-concordance of end-of-life care. CONCLUSIONS: Over half of decedents who underwent maintenance dialysis received physician-delivered palliative care in the last year of life, albeit typically starting 3 weeks before death. This may indicate a perception that palliative care is exclusively for end-of-life care. More research is required to identify barriers to delivering equitable palliative care. PLAIN-LANGUAGE SUMMARY: There is limited information about doctor-provided palliative care and the factors associated with receiving this care in people on maintenance dialysis. Among 18,452 people on dialysis who died in Ontario between 2012 and 2020, we found that 52% received palliative care in the last year of life starting a median of 23 days before death. Care was typically provided by family doctors in clinics without participation by palliative care specialists. Patients who were recent immigrants, who lived in low-income neighborhoods, or who lived in rural areas were less likely to receive palliative care. Hospital deaths were less common in people who received palliative care, especially if it was provided in the home. These findings highlight the need to better understand barriers to receiving timely and equitable palliative care for people on dialysis.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,002 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,002 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».