Disparities in end-of-life care for racial minorities: a narrative review.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The issue of racial and ethnic disparities in healthcare has been a significant concern for many years. It encompasses various aspects, including disease prevention, diagnosis, management, and end-of-life (EOL) care. Research has found that timely intervention with palliative care can result in better EOL care and reduced healthcare costs. This review aims to detail the role of healthcare disparities impacting palliative care, hospice enrollment, and EOL care in patients with serious illnesses who are facing EOL. It addresses the factors that play a role in creating these disparities and describes specific interventions that may reduce disparities in the provision of EOL care. METHODS: Authors searched, PubMed Central, Medline, and PubMed databases using Racial Disparity and End-of-Life/Palliative Care combinations. A total of 57 studies were identified. All articles were reviewed, and the available evidence was synthesized and to identify key domains in EOL care impacted by racial disparities and the factors contributing to them. KEY CONTENT AND FINDINGS: Several patient, provider, and institutional level factors may be responsible for disparities seen in EOL care, including health literacy, access to care, mistrust of the healthcare system, social determinants of health (SDH), medical racism, cultural and religious customs, and communication at EOL. Disparities in EOL care experienced by minority patients is an extension of the systemic and institutionalized racism rampant in the healthcare system. Providers must work on multiple fronts to address this inequity and injustice, the first of which is recognition and conversation regarding disparities in EOL care. CONCLUSIONS: Disparities in communication, palliative and hospice care utilization, and symptom management must be eradicated. Palliative care and hospice should be made accessible for all patients and families experiencing severe illness regardless of their racial or ethnic background.

Assessment of Discordance Between Surrogate Care Goals and Medical Treatment Provided to Older Adults With Serious Illness.

Importance: An important aspect of high-quality care is ensuring that treatments are in alignment with patient or surrogate decision-maker goals. Treatment discordant with patient goals has been shown to increase medical costs and prolong end-of-life difficulties. Objectives: To evaluate discordance between surrogate decision-maker goals of care and medical orders and treatments provided to hospitalized, incapacitated older patients. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort study included 363 patient-surrogate dyads. Patients were 65 years or older and faced at least 1 major medical decision in the medical and medical intensive care unit services in 3 tertiary care hospitals in an urban Midwestern area. Data were collected from April 27, 2012, through July 10, 2015, and analyzed from October 5, 2018, to December 5, 2019. Main Outcomes and Measures: Each surrogate's preferred goal of care was determined via interview during initial hospitalization and 6 to 8 weeks after discharge. Surrogates were asked to select the goal of care for the patient from 3 options: comfort-focused care, life-sustaining treatment, or an intermediate option. To assess discordance, the preferred goal of care as determined by the surrogate was compared with data from medical record review outlining the medical treatment received during the target hospitalization. Results: A total of 363 dyads consisting of patients (223 women [61.4%]; mean [SD] age, 81.8 [8.3] years) and their surrogates (257 women [70.8%]; mean [SD] age, 58.3 [11.2] years) were included in the analysis. One hundred sixty-nine patients (46.6%) received at least 1 medical treatment discordant from their surrogate's identified goals of care. The most common type of discordance involved full-code orders for patients with a goal of comfort (n = 41) or an intermediate option (n = 93). More frequent in-person contact between surrogate and patient (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 0.43; 95% CI, 0.23-0.82), patient residence in an institution (AOR, 0.44; 95% CI, 0.23-0.82), and surrogate-rated quality of communication (AOR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.96-0.99) were associated with lower discordance. Surrogate marital status (AOR for single vs married, 1.92; 95% CI, 1.01-3.66), number of family members involved in decisions (AOR for ≥2 vs 0-1, 1.84; 95% CI, 1.05-3.21), and religious affiliation (AOR for none vs any, 4.87; 95% CI, 1.12-21.09) were associated with higher discordance. Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that discordance between surrogate goals of care and medical treatments for hospitalized, incapacitated patients was common. Communication quality is a modifiable factor associated with discordance that may be an avenue for future interventions.