MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4286257607 · doi:10.1136/ebm-2022-ebmlive.11

75  The association between patient ethnicity and family satisfaction with the quality and provision of end-of-life care

2022· article· en· W4286257607 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Ayah Nayfeh, Christopher J. Yarnell, Craig Dale, Lesley Gotlib Conn, Brigette Hales, Tracey Das Gupta, Anita Chakraborty, Ruxandra Pinto, Ru Taggar, Robert Fowler

Bibliographic record

VenueAbstracts · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldHealth Professions
TopicPatient Satisfaction in Healthcare
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEthnic groupEnd-of-life careObservational studyQuality of life (healthcare)MedicinePatient satisfactionLife satisfactionLikert scaleReligiosityPoisson regressionFamily medicinePsychologyGerontologyNursingPalliative careSocial psychology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Objectives Among patients who have died in Ontario, Canada, recent immigrants and ethnic minorities were more likely to receive aggressive treatment in the last six months of life and more likely to die in intensive care units (ICU) in comparison to other patients. Insight into the end-of-life care experiences of patients from diverse ethnocultural backgrounds can help identify high priority areas for quality improvement. This observational survey-based study aimed to evaluate satisfaction with the quality of end-of-life care for patients of diverse ethnocultural backgrounds from the perspective of bereaved family members. The primary aim was to evaluate the association between satisfaction with quality of end-of-life care and patient ethnocultural characteristics. The secondary aim was to identify high priority areas for quality-of-care improvement. Method The End-of-Life Satisfaction Survey (a validated 52-item tool) was used to measure satisfaction with the quality of in-patient end-of-life care from the perspective of next-of-kin of recently deceased patients at Sunnybrook Health Sciences Centre in Toronto, Canada (between March 2012 to May 2019). The primary outcome was the global rating of satisfaction score which was measured on a 10-point Likert scale. Potential explanatory variables were selected a priori based on clinical relevance to the research question and prior research. Associations with patient ethnicity, patient religion, level of religiosity/spirituality, language/communication barriers, and location of death were assessed using univariable and multivariable modified Poisson regression. Secondary outcomes included differences in satisfaction and rates of dying in ICU among patient population subgroups, and identification of high priority areas for quality-of-care improvement. Results are described in terms of relative risk (RR) with a significance threshold level of α=0.05. Descriptive statistics included counts and proportions for categorical variables and means (standard deviations) and medians (interquartile ranges) for continuous variables. Results There were 1,543 respondents. Patient ethnicities included Caucasian (68.2%), Mediterranean (10.5%), East Asian (7.6%), South Asian (3.5%), Southeast Asian (2.1%) and Middle Eastern (2.0%); religious affiliations included Christianity (66.6%), Judaism (12.3%) and Islam (2.1%), among others. Location of death was most commonly in ICU (38.4%), hospital wards (37.0%) or long-term care (20.0%). The mean(SD) rating of satisfaction score was 8.30(2.09) of 10. Satisfaction with the quality of end-of-life care was higher among patients dying in ICU versus other locations (adjusted RR 1.51, 95%CI 1.05-2.19, p=0.028), lower among those who experienced language/communication barriers (adjusted RR 0.49 95%CI 0.23-1.06, p=0.069), and lower for Muslim patients versus other religious affiliations (adjusted RR 0.46, 95%CI 0.21-1.02, p=0.056). High priority areas for quality-of-care improvement included: communication and information giving; illness management; and healthcare provider characteristics such as emotional support, doctor availability and time spent with patient/family. Conclusions Satisfaction with the quality of end-of-life care was higher among patients dying in ICU compared to other hospital units and lower among Muslim patients or when there were language/communication barriers between patients, families and the healthcare team. These findings underscore the need to identify and remedy potential disparities in care delivery and/or ethnocultural expectations for care that may contribute to lower satisfaction at the end of life. Complementary qualitative research designs should seek to capture the patient care experience of patients and families from specific ethnocultural backgrounds. Presenter/Submitter Biography* Provide a 3-4 sentence biography exactly the way you would like it read for your introduction and loaded onto conference app. Your biography is limited to 150 words. Please read your biography aloud once it is written to ensure it can be effortlessly delivered by the session monitor. Ayah Nayfeh is a PhD candidate in Health Services Research at the University of Toronto’s Institute of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation (IHPME). Her research background and interest in health equity and implementation science led to her academic work around improving end-of-life care for recently immigrated and ethnic minority patients in Canada. Ayah has previously held positions at Healthcare Excellence Canada; the Canadian Institutes of Health Research; and at Canada’s International Development Research Centre. She received a MSc in Interdisciplinary Health Sciences from the University of Ottawa and a BHSc (Hons) in Health Sciences with a Specialization in Biology from the University of Western Ontario.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.008
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.033
Threshold uncertainty score0.067

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.008
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0010.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0040.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.102
GPT teacher head0.416
Teacher spread0.314 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2022
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAbstractsSame topicPatient Satisfaction in HealthcareFrench-language works237,207