Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-jkksz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-23T08:57:40.190Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Predictors of Place of Death for Seniors in Ontario: A Population-Based Cohort Analysis*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2010

Sanober S. Motiwala ,
Ruth Croxford ,
Denise N. Guerriere  and
Peter C. Coyte
Sanober S. Motiwala
Affiliation:
Department of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto
Ruth Croxford
Affiliation:
Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Sunnybrook and Women's College Health Sciences Centre, Toronto
Denise N. Guerriere
Affiliation:
Department of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto
Peter C. Coyte*
Affiliation:
Department of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, University of Toronto Institute for Clinical Evaluative Sciences, Toronto, Ontario
*
Requests for offprints should be sent to:/Les demandes de tirés-à-part doivent être addressées à : Dr. Peter C. Coyte, Department of Health Policy, Management and Evaluation, Faculty of Medicine, University of Toronto, 155 College Street, Suite 425, Toronto, ON M5T 1P8. ([email protected])
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Place of death was determined for all 58,689 seniors (age ≥ 66 years) in Ontario who died during fiscal year 2001/2002. The relationship of place of death to medical and socio-demographic characteristics was examined using a multinomial logit model. Half (49.2%) of these individuals died in hospital, 30.5 per cent died in a long-term care facility, 9.6 per cent died at home while receiving home care, and 10.7 per cent died at home without home care. Co-morbidities were the strongest predictors of place of death (p < 0.0001). A cancer diagnosis increased the chances of death at home while receiving home care; seniors with dementia were most likely to die in LTC facilities; and those with major acute conditions were most likely to die in hospitals. Higher socio-economic status was associated with greater probability of dying at home but contributed little to the model. Appropriate planning and resource allocation may help move place of death from hospitals to nursing homes or the community, in accordance with individual preferences.

Résumé

Nous avons déterminé le lieu du décès de la totalité des 58689 personnes âgées (âge ≥ 66 ans) en Ontario qui étaient décédées pendant l'exercice 2001-2002. La relation entre le lieu du décès et les caractéristiques médicales et sociodémographiques a été examinée à l'aide d'un modèle logit multinomial. La moitié (49,2%) de ces personnes étaient mortes à l'hôpital, 30,5% dans un établissement de soins de longue durée, 9,6% à la maison tout en recevant des soins à domicile et 10,7% à la maison alors qu'ils ne recevaient pas de soins à domicile. La comorbidité était le plus fort prédicteur du lieu de décès (p < 0,0001). Les personnes atteintes de cancer mourraient probablement à la maison tout en recevant des soins à domicile ; les personnes âgées souffrant de démence allaient probablement mourir dans un établissement de soins prolongés ; celles se trouvant en phase aiguë allaient probablement mourir à l'hôpital. Les personnes dont le statut socio-économique était plus élevé avaient plus de chances de mourir à la maison, mais cet élément a peu contribué au modèle. Une planification et une attribution des ressources appropriées peuvent aider à déplacer le lieu de décès des hôpitaux vers les maisons de soins infirmiers ou vers les services communautaires, selon les préférences de chacun.

Keywords

agingplace of deathhomehospitalsocio-economic statusco-morbiditiesvieillissementlieu de décèsmaisonhôpitalstatut socio-économiquecomorbidité
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement , Volume 25 , Issue 4 , Winter/Hiver 2006 , pp. 363 - 371
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association on Gerontology 2006

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

The authors thank Drs. Whitney Berta, Rhonda Cockerill, and Joan Tranmer for comments on earlier versions of this paper. Sanober Motiwala was partially funded by a CHSRF/CIHR Health Services Research Training Award. ICES is funded by the Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care.

References

1.Wilson, DM. End-of-life care preferences of Canadian senior citizens with caregiving experience. J Adv Nurs 2000;31(6):1416–1421.Google Scholar
2.Heyland, DK, Lavery, JV, Tranmer, JE, Shortt, SE, & Taylor, SJ. Dying in Canada: is it an institutionalized, technology supported experience?. J Palliat Care 2000;16(Suppl. Oct):S10–S16.Google Scholar
3.Townsend, J, Frank, AO, Fermont, D, Dyer, S, Karran, O, Walgrove, A, et al. Terminal cancer care and patients' preference for place of death: a prospective study. BMJ 1990;301:415–417.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
4.Dunlop, RJ, Davies, RJ, & Hockley, JM. Preferred versus actual place of death: a hospital palliative care support team experience. Palliat Med 1989;3:197–201.Google Scholar
5.De Conno, FD, Caraceni, A, Groff, L, Brunelli, C, Donati, I, Tamburini, M, et al. Effect of home care on the place of death of advanced cancer patients. Eur J Cancer 1996;32A:1142–1147.Google Scholar
6.Lubin, S. Palliative care: could your patient have been managed at home?. J Palliat Care 1992;8(2):18–22.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
7.Higginson, IJ, Jarman, B, Astin, P, & Dolan, S. Do social factors affect where patients die: an analysis of 10 years of cancer deaths in England. J Public Health Med 1999;21(1):22–28.Google Scholar
8.Mors, V, & Hiris, J. Determinants of site of death among hospice cancer patients. J Health Soc Behav 1983;24:375–385.Google Scholar
9.Costantini, M, Balzi, D, Garronec, E, Orlandini, C, Parodi, S, Vercelli, M, et al. Geographical variations of place of death among Italian communities suggest an inappropriate hospital use in the terminal phase of cancer disease. Public Health 2000;114:15–20.Google Scholar
10.Pritchard, RS, Fisher, ES, Teno, JM, Sharp, SM, Reading, DJ, Knaus, WA, et al. Influence of patient preferences and local health system characteristics on the place of death. J Am Geriatr Soc 1998;46:1242–1250.Google Scholar
11.Cartwright, A, Hockley, L, & Anderson, J. (1973). Life before death. London: Routledge and Kegan Paul.Google Scholar
12.Clifford, C, Jolley, D, & Giles, G. Where people die in Victoria. Med J Aust 1991;155:446–456.Google Scholar
13.Polissar, L, Severson, R, & Brown, N. Factors affecting place of death in Washington State, 1968–1981. J Community Health 1987;12(1):40–55.Google Scholar
14.Seale, C, & Cartwright, A. The year before death. Avebury, UK: Aldershot; 1994.Google Scholar
15.Hunt, RW, Bond, MJ, Groth, RK, & King, P. Place of death in South Australia: patterns from 1910–1987. Med J Aust 1991;155:549–553.Google Scholar
16.Wilson, DM, Northcott, HC, Truman, CD, Smith, SL, Anderson, MC, Fainsinger, RL, et al. . Location of death in Canada: A comparison of 20th-century hospital and nonhospital locations of death and corresponding population trends. Eval Health Prof 2001;24(4):385–403.Google Scholar
17.Moinpour, CM, & Polissar, L. Factors affecting place of death of hospice and non-hospice cancer patients. Am J Public Health 1989;79(11):1549–1551.Google Scholar
18.Weitzen, S, Teno, JM, Fennell, M, & Mor, V. Factors associated with site of death: a national study of where people die. Med Care 2002;41(2):323–335.Google Scholar
19.Freeborne, N, Lynn, J, & Desbiens, NA. Insights about dying from the SUPPORT Project. J Am Geriatr Soc 2000;48:S199–S205.Google Scholar
20.Gallo, WT, Baker, MJ, & Bradley, EH. Factors associated with home versus institutional death among cancer patients in Connecticut. J Am Geriatr Soc 2001;49(6):771–777.Google Scholar
21.McWhinney, IR, Bass, MJ, & Orr, V. Factors associated with location of death (home or hospital) of patients referred to a palliative care team. CMAJ 1995;152(3):361–367.Google Scholar
22.Burge, F, Lawson, B, & Johnston, G. Trends in the place of death of cancer patients, 1992–1997. CMAJ 2003;168(3):265–270.Google Scholar
23.Menec, V, Lix, L, Steinbach, C, Ekuma, O, Sirski, M, Dahl, M, et al. Patterns of health care use and cost at the end of life. Winnipeg, MB: Manitoba Centre for Health Policy; 2004.Google Scholar
24.Flood, C, & Archibald, T. The illegality of private health care in Canada. CMAJ 2001;164:825–830.Google Scholar
25.Canadian Healthcare Association. Guide to Canadian healthcare facilities. vol 9. Ottawa: Canadian Healthcare Association; 2002.Google Scholar
26.Tranmer, JE, Croxford, R, & Coyte, P. Dementia in Ontario: prevalence and health care utilization. Can J Aging 2003;22(4):369–379.Google Scholar
27.D'Hoore, W, Bouckaert, A, & Tilquin, C. Practical considerations on the use of the Charlson comorbidity index with administrative data bases. J Clin Epidemiol 1996;49(12):1429–1433.Google Scholar
28.Streiner, DL, & Norman, GR. Health measurement scales: a practical guide to their development and use. 3rd ed.New York: Oxford University Press; 1995.Google Scholar
29.The Johns Hopkins ACG case-mix system. [Online] [cited: 2005 Apr 11]; Available from: http://www.acg.jhsph.edu/.Google Scholar
30.Reid, RJ, MacWilliam, L, Verhulst, L, Roos, N, & Atkinson, M. Performance of the ACG case-mix system in two Canadian provinces. Med Care 2001;39(1):86–99.Google Scholar
31.Carstairs, V, & Morris, R. Deprivation and health in Scotland. Aberdeen, UK: Aberdeen University Press; 1991.Google Scholar
32.Croxford, R, Freidberg, J, & Coyte, PC. Socio-economic status and surgery in children: myringotomies and tonsillectomies in Ontario, Canada, 1996–2000. Acta Paediatr 2004;93:1245–1250.Google Scholar
33.Gansler, T, Henley, SJ, Stein, K, Nehl, EJ, Smigal, C, & Slaughter, E. Sociodemographic determinants of cancer treatment health literacy. Cancer 2005;104(3):653–660.Google Scholar
34.Williams, DR. Racial/ethnic variations in women's health: the social embeddedness of health. Am J Public Health 2002;92(4):588–597.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
35.Nagelkerke, NJD. A note on a general definition of the coefficient of determination. Biometrika 1991;78:691–692.Google Scholar
36.Grunfeld, E, Coyle, D, Whelan, T, Clinch, J, Reyno, L, Earle, CC, et al. Family caregiver burden: results of a longitudinal study of breast cancer patients and their principal caregivers. CMAJ 2004;170(12):1811–1812.Google Scholar
37.Schulz, R, O'Brien, AT, Bookwala, J, & Fleissner, K. Psychiatric and physical morbidity effects of dementia caregiving: prevalence, correlates, and causes. Gerontologist 1995;35(6):771–791.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
38.Torti, FM, Gwyther, LP, Reed, SD, Friedman, JY, & Schulman, KA. A multinomial review of recent trends and reports in dementia caregiver burden. Alzheimer Dis Assoc Disord 2004;18:99–109.Google Scholar
39.Van Dijk, J. The role of ethnicity and religion in the social support system of older Dutch Canadians. Can J Aging 2004;23(1):21–34.Google Scholar
40.Cantwell, P, Turco, S, Brenneis, C, Hanson, J, Neumann, C, & Bruera, E. Predictors of home death in palliative care cancer patients. J Palliat Care 2000;16(1):23–28.Google Scholar
41.Stafford, M, & Marmot, M. Neighbourhood deprivation and health: does it affect us all equally?. Int J Epidemiol 2003;32:357–366.Google Scholar
42.Hollander, M, & Chappell, N. Final report of the national evaluation of the cost-effectiveness of home care. Victoria, BC: Hollander Analytical Services; 2002.Google Scholar