Measuring Intensity of End of Life Care: A Systematic Review.

Luta, Xhyljeta; Maessen, Maud; Egger, Matthias; Stuck, Andreas; Goodman, David; Clough-Gorr, Kerri M (2015). Measuring Intensity of End of Life Care: A Systematic Review. PLoS ONE, 10(4), e0123764. Public Library of Science 10.1371/journal.pone.0123764

[img]
Preview
Text
Luta PLoSOne 2015.pdf - Published Version
Available under License Creative Commons: Attribution (CC-BY).

Download (365kB) | Preview

BACKGROUND Many studies have measured the intensity of end of life care. However, no summary of the measures used in the field is currently available. OBJECTIVES To summarise features, characteristics of use and reported validity of measures used for evaluating intensity of end of life care. METHODS This was a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. We performed a comprehensive literature search in Ovid Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews and reference lists published between 1990-2014. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, full texts and extracted data. Studies were eligible if they used a measure of end of life care intensity, defined as all quantifiable measures describing the type and intensity of medical care administered during the last year of life. RESULTS A total of 58 of 1590 potentially eligible studies met our inclusion criteria and were included. The most commonly reported measures were hospitalizations (n = 44), intensive care unit admissions (n = 39) and chemotherapy use (n = 27). Studies measured intensity of care in different timeframes ranging from 48 hours to 12 months. The majority of studies were conducted in cancer patients (n = 31). Only 4 studies included information on validation of the measures used. None evaluated construct validity, while 3 studies considered criterion and 1 study reported both content and criterion validity. CONCLUSIONS This review provides a synthesis to aid in choosing intensity of end of life care measures based on their previous use but simultaneously highlights the crucial need for more validation studies and consensus in the field.

Item Type:

Journal Article (Original Article)

Division/Institute:

04 Faculty of Medicine > Pre-clinic Human Medicine > Institute of Social and Preventive Medicine
04 Faculty of Medicine > Department of General Internal Medicine (DAIM) > Geriatric Clinic

UniBE Contributor:

Luta, Xhyljeta; Maessen, Maud; Egger, Matthias; Stuck, Andreas and Clough, Kerri

Subjects:

600 Technology > 610 Medicine & health
300 Social sciences, sociology & anthropology > 360 Social problems & social services

ISSN:

1932-6203

Publisher:

Public Library of Science

Language:

English

Submitter:

Doris Kopp Heim

Date Deposited:

17 Apr 2015 10:12

Last Modified:

17 Apr 2015 10:12

Publisher DOI:

10.1371/journal.pone.0123764

PubMed ID:

25875471

BORIS DOI:

10.7892/boris.67998

URI:

https://boris.unibe.ch/id/eprint/67998

Actions (login required)

Edit item Edit item
Provide Feedback