13
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: not found

      Dying from Covid-19: Loneliness, end-of-life discussions and support for patients and their families in nursing homes and hospitals. A national register study

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          Preparation for an impending death through EOL (end-of-life) discussions and human presence when a person is dying is important for both patients and families.

          Objective

          The aim was to study whether EOL discussions were offered and to what degree patients were alone at time of death when dying from Covid-19, comparing deaths in nursing homes and hospitals.

          Design

          The national Swedish Register of Palliative Care (SRPC) was used. All expected deaths from Covid-19 in nursing homes and hospitals were compared with, and contrasted to, deaths in a reference population (deaths in 2019).

          Setting and subjects

          A total of 1346 expected Covid-19 deaths in nursing homes (n=908) and hospitals (n=438) were analyzed.

          Results

          Those who died were of a more advanced age in nursing homes (mean 86.4 years) and of a lower age in hospitals (mean 80.7 years) (p<0.0001). Fewer EOL discussions with patients were held compared with deaths in 2019 (74% vs. 79%, p<0.001) and dying with someone present was much more uncommon (59% vs. 83%, p<0.0001).

          In comparisons between nursing homes and hospital deaths, more patients dying in nursing homes were women (56% vs. 37%, p<0.0001) and significantly fewer had a retained ability to express their will during the last week of life (54% vs. 89%, p<0.0001). Relatives were present at time of death in only 13% and 24% of the cases in nursing homes and hospitals, respectively (p<0.001). The corresponding figures for staff were 52% and 38% (p<0.0001).

          Conclusion

          Dying from Covid-19 negatively affects the possibility of holding an EOL discussion and the chances of dying with someone present. This has considerable social and existential consequences for both patients and families.

          Related collections

          Most cited references22

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Not Dying Alone — Modern Compassionate Care in the Covid-19 Pandemic

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            Defining a Good Death (Successful Dying): Literature Review and a Call for Research and Public Dialogue.

            There is little agreement about what constitutes good death or successful dying. The authors conducted a literature search for published, English-language, peer-reviewed reports of qualitative and quantitative studies that provided a definition of a good death. Stakeholders in these articles included patients, prebereaved and bereaved family members, and healthcare providers (HCPs). Definitions found were categorized into core themes and subthemes, and the frequency of each theme was determined by stakeholder (patients, family, HCPs) perspectives. Thirty-six studies met eligibility criteria, with 50% of patient perspective articles including individuals over age 60 years. We identified 11 core themes of good death: preferences for a specific dying process, pain-free status, religiosity/spirituality, emotional well-being, life completion, treatment preferences, dignity, family, quality of life, relationship with HCP, and other. The top three themes across all stakeholder groups were preferences for dying process (94% of reports), pain-free status (81%), and emotional well-being (64%). However, some discrepancies among the respondent groups were noted in the core themes: Family perspectives included life completion (80%), quality of life (70%), dignity (70%), and presence of family (70%) more frequently than did patient perspectives regarding those items (35%-55% each). In contrast, religiosity/spirituality was reported somewhat more often in patient perspectives (65%) than in family perspectives (50%). Taking into account the limitations of the literature, further research is needed on the impact of divergent perspectives on end-of-life care. Dialogues among the stakeholders for each individual must occur to ensure a good death from the most critical viewpoint-the patient's.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              Advance care planning: A systematic review about experiences of patients with a life-threatening or life-limiting illness

              Background: Advance care planning is seen as an important strategy to improve end-of-life communication and the quality of life of patients and their relatives. However, the frequency of advance care planning conversations in practice remains low. In-depth understanding of patients’ experiences with advance care planning might provide clues to optimise its value to patients and improve implementation. Aim: To synthesise and describe the research findings on the experiences with advance care planning of patients with a life-threatening or life-limiting illness. Design: A systematic literature review, using an iterative search strategy. A thematic synthesis was conducted and was supported by NVivo 11. Data sources: The search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO and CINAHL on 7 November 2016. Results: Of the 3555 articles found, 20 were included. We identified three themes in patients’ experiences with advance care planning. ‘Ambivalence’ refers to patients simultaneously experiencing benefits from advance care planning as well as unpleasant feelings. ‘Readiness’ for advance care planning is a necessary prerequisite for taking up its benefits but can also be promoted by the process of advance care planning itself. ‘Openness’ refers to patients’ need to feel comfortable in being open about their preferences for future care towards relevant others. Conclusion: Although participation in advance care planning can be accompanied by unpleasant feelings, many patients reported benefits of advance care planning as well. This suggests a need for advance care planning to be personalised in a form which is both feasible and relevant at moments suitable for the individual patient.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: associate professor
                Journal
                J Pain Symptom Manage
                J Pain Symptom Manage
                Journal of Pain and Symptom Management
                Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine
                0885-3924
                1873-6513
                25 July 2020
                25 July 2020
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Professor of Palliative Medicine, Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institutet, Stockholm and R & D department, Stockholms Sjukhem Foundation, Stockholm, Sweden
                [2 ]Palliative Care Unit Stockholms Sjukhem Foundation, Stockholm, Sweden
                [3 ]Department of radiation sciences, Umeå university, SE-90187, Umeå, Sweden
                [4 ]Department of Oncology-Pathology, Karolinska Institutet Stockholm and R & D department, Stockholms Sjukhem Foundation
                Author notes
                []Corresponding author: Peter Strang, MD, PhD, Professor of palliative medicine, Karolinska Institutet and R & D department, Stockholms Sjukhem Foundation, Stockholm, Sweden, Postal address: Professor Peter Strang, Stockholms Sjukhem Foundation´s R&D (FoUU), P.O. Box 12230 102 26 Stockholm, SWEDEN, 102 26, Stockholm, SWEDEN. . Cell Phone: +46-76-555 8068 peter.strang@ 123456ki.se
                Article
                S0885-3924(20)30630-8
                10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2020.07.020
                7382350
                32721500
                dd419994-1bef-40f2-b5c9-ceaae424cbf8
                © 2020 Published by Elsevier Inc. on behalf of American Academy of Hospice and Palliative Medicine.

                Since January 2020 Elsevier has created a COVID-19 resource centre with free information in English and Mandarin on the novel coronavirus COVID-19. The COVID-19 resource centre is hosted on Elsevier Connect, the company's public news and information website. Elsevier hereby grants permission to make all its COVID-19-related research that is available on the COVID-19 resource centre - including this research content - immediately available in PubMed Central and other publicly funded repositories, such as the WHO COVID database with rights for unrestricted research re-use and analyses in any form or by any means with acknowledgement of the original source. These permissions are granted for free by Elsevier for as long as the COVID-19 resource centre remains active.

                History
                : 9 June 2020
                : 17 July 2020
                : 18 July 2020
                Categories
                Article

                covid-19,dying alone,eol discussions,nursing homes,hospital care

                Comments

                Comment on this article