TY - JOUR
T1 - Patient and family preferences about place of end-of-life care and death
T2 - an umbrella review
AU - Pinto, Sara
AU - Lopes, Sílvia
AU - de Sousa, Andrea Bruno
AU - Delalibera, Mayra
AU - Gomes, Barbara
N1 - Funding Information:
All authors have completed the Unified Competing Interest form (available on request from the corresponding author) at www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/. BG is first author of one included systematic review. She did not take part in the selection, quality assessment, data extraction, analysis or conclusions in relation to this study. The authors thank Edoardo Aromataris (Director of Synthesis Science at the JBI, University of Adelaide), Kawaldip Sehmi (Chief Executive Officer of IAPO), Stecy Yghemonos (Director of Eurocarers), Isabel Andrade (Head Librarian at Nova National School of Public Health, Universidade Nova de Lisboa) and Barbara Antunes (Visiting Researcher at the University of Cambridge) for their contribution to the protocol and review development. This work is part of the project ´EOLinPLACE: Choice of where we die: a classification reform to discern diversity in individual end of life pathways´, which has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement No 948609). The funder had no role in the protocol development and in the review execution, analysis, interpretation of the data, or decision to submit results. BG (the guarantor of the review) declares that the manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study being reported; no important aspects of the study have been omitted and any discrepancies from the study as planned (and, if relevant, registered) have been explained.
Funding Information:
All authors have completed the Unified Competing Interest form (available on request from the corresponding author) at www.icmje.org/disclosure-of-interest/. BG is first author of one included systematic review. She did not take part in the selection, quality assessment, data extraction, analysis or conclusions in relation to this study. The authors thank Edoardo Aromataris (Director of Synthesis Science at the JBI, University of Adelaide), Kawaldip Sehmi (Chief Executive Officer of IAPO), Stecy Yghemonos (Director of Eurocarers), Isabel Andrade (Head Librarian at Nova National School of Public Health, Universidade Nova de Lisboa) and Barbara Antunes (Visiting Researcher at the University of Cambridge) for their contribution to the protocol and review development. This work is part of the project ´EOLinPLACE: Choice of where we die: a classification reform to discern diversity in individual end of life pathways´, which has received funding from the European Research Council (ERC) under the European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement No 948609). The funder had no role in the protocol development and in the review execution, analysis, interpretation of the data, or decision to submit results. BG (the guarantor of the review) declares that the manuscript is an honest, accurate, and transparent account of the study being reported; no important aspects of the study have been omitted and any discrepancies from the study as planned (and, if relevant, registered) have been explained.
Publisher Copyright:
© 2024 The Authors
PY - 2024/5
Y1 - 2024/5
N2 - Context: The place where people are cared towards the end of their life and die is a complex phenomenon, requiring a deeper understanding. Honoring preferences is critical for the delivery of high-quality care. Objectives: In this umbrella review we examine and synthesize the evidence regarding preferences about place of end-of-life care and death of patients with life-threatening illnesses and their families. Methods: Following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology, we conducted a comprehensive search for systematic reviews in PsycINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Epistemonikos, and PROSPERO without language restrictions. Results: The search identified 15 reviews (10 high-quality, three with meta-analysis), covering 229 nonoverlapping primary studies. Home is the most preferred place of end-of-life care for both patients (11%–89%) and family members (23%–84%). It is also the most preferred place of death (patient estimates from two meta-analyses: 51%–55%). Hospitals and hospice/palliative care facilities are preferred by substantial minorities. Reasons and factors affecting preferences include illness-related, individual, and environmental. Differences between preferred places of care and death are underexplored and the evidence remains inconclusive about changes over time. Congruence between preferred and actual place of death ranges 21%-100%, is higher in studies since 2004 and a meta-analysis shows noncancer patients are at higher risk of incongruence than cancer patients (OR 1.23, 95% CI: 1.01–1.49, I2 = 62%). Conclusion: These findings are a crucial starting point to address gaps and enhance strategies to align care with patient and family preferences. To accurately identify patient and family preferences is an important opportunity to change their lives positively.
AB - Context: The place where people are cared towards the end of their life and die is a complex phenomenon, requiring a deeper understanding. Honoring preferences is critical for the delivery of high-quality care. Objectives: In this umbrella review we examine and synthesize the evidence regarding preferences about place of end-of-life care and death of patients with life-threatening illnesses and their families. Methods: Following the Joanna Briggs Institute methodology, we conducted a comprehensive search for systematic reviews in PsycINFO, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Epistemonikos, and PROSPERO without language restrictions. Results: The search identified 15 reviews (10 high-quality, three with meta-analysis), covering 229 nonoverlapping primary studies. Home is the most preferred place of end-of-life care for both patients (11%–89%) and family members (23%–84%). It is also the most preferred place of death (patient estimates from two meta-analyses: 51%–55%). Hospitals and hospice/palliative care facilities are preferred by substantial minorities. Reasons and factors affecting preferences include illness-related, individual, and environmental. Differences between preferred places of care and death are underexplored and the evidence remains inconclusive about changes over time. Congruence between preferred and actual place of death ranges 21%-100%, is higher in studies since 2004 and a meta-analysis shows noncancer patients are at higher risk of incongruence than cancer patients (OR 1.23, 95% CI: 1.01–1.49, I2 = 62%). Conclusion: These findings are a crucial starting point to address gaps and enhance strategies to align care with patient and family preferences. To accurately identify patient and family preferences is an important opportunity to change their lives positively.
KW - hospice care
KW - palliative care
KW - Patient preference
KW - systematic review
KW - terminal care
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85184038252&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2024.01.014
DO - 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2024.01.014
M3 - Review article
C2 - 38237790
AN - SCOPUS:85184038252
SN - 0885-3924
VL - 67
SP - e439-e452
JO - Journal of pain and symptom management
JF - Journal of pain and symptom management
IS - 5
ER -