Approaching the End of Life: Attitudes, Preferences, and Behaviors of African-American and White Patients and Their Family Caregivers

Author:

Phipps Etienne1,True Gala1,Harris Diana1,Chong Umi1,Tester William1,Chavin Stephen I.1,Braitman Leonard E.1

Affiliation:

1. From the Albert Einstein Healthcare Network, Philadelphia, PA.

Abstract

Purpose: To investigate differences in attitudes, preferences, and behaviors regarding end of life in terminally ill patients and their designated family caregivers. Patients and Methods: 68 African-American and white patients with stage III-B or IV lung or stage IV colon cancer and 68 patient-designated family caregivers interviewed between December 1999 and May 2001. Results: White patients were more likely to have a durable power of attorney (34% v 8%, P = .01) and were more likely to have a living will (LW; 41% v 11%, P = .004) than were African-American patients. More African-American than white patients desired the use of life-sustaining measures (cardiopulmonary resusitation [CPR], mechanical ventilation, tube feeding) in their current condition (all P > .12). In a near-death condition, African-American patients were more likely than white patients to desire each of the life-sustaining measures (all P < .004). There was no patient-caregiver agreement beyond chance regarding preferences for initiation of CPR, tube feeding, or mechanical ventilation in the patient’s current condition or in the near-death condition. In the near-death condition in patients without LWs, there was disagreement in 46% of patient-caregiver pairs about CPR, in 50% about mechanical ventilation, and in 43% about tube feeding. Conclusion: Although most patients and families endorse the primacy of the patient in decisions at end of life, the majority do not take supporting actions. Disagreements between patients and families about the use of life-sustaining measures in patients without LWs may result in patients’ preferences being superseded at end of life.

Publisher

American Society of Clinical Oncology (ASCO)

Subject

Cancer Research,Oncology

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3