Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros











Base de datos
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
J Pain Symptom Manage ; 59(5): 1019-1032.e1, 2020 05.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31837451

RESUMEN

CONTEXT: Despite the preference to pass away at home, many dementia patients die in institutions, resulting in a paucity of studies examining end-of-life care outcomes in the home setting. OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to identify modifiable factors associated with the comfort of dementia patients dying at home and families' satisfaction with care. METHODS: This is a prospective cohort study conducted from October 2014 to April 2019 in Singapore. Dementia patients at Stage 7 on the Functional Assessment Staging Scale, with albumin <35 g/L, enteral feeding, or pneumonia, were recruited from a palliative homecare program. Independent variables included demographics, medical information, and care preferences. The Comfort Assessment in Dying with Dementia scale assessed dying patients' comfort, whereas the Satisfaction with Care at the End-of-Life in Dementia scale evaluated family caregivers' satisfaction two months after bereavement. Gamma regression identified factors independently associated with comfort and satisfaction. RESULTS: The median age of 202 deceased patients whose comfort was assessed was 88 years. Anti-cholinergic prescription (60.4% of patients) [ß (95% CI) = 1.823 (0.660-2.986), P = 0.002] was positively associated with comfort, whereas opioid prescription (89.6%) [ß (95% CI) = -2.179 (-4.107 to -0.251), P = 0.027] and >1 antibiotic courses used in the last two weeks of life (77.2%) [ß (95% CI) = -1.968 (-3.196 to -0.740), P = 0.002] were negatively associated. Independent factors associated with families' satisfaction with care were comfort [ß (95% CI) = 0.149 (0.012-0.286), P = 0.033] and honoring of medical intervention preferences (96.0%) [ß (95% CI) = 3.969 (1.485-6.453), P = 0.002]. CONCLUSION: Achieving comfort and satisfaction with care for dementia patients dying at home involves an interplay of modifiable factors. Honoring medical intervention preferences, such as those with palliative intent associated with patients' comfort, determined families' satisfaction with care.


Asunto(s)
Demencia , Cuidado Terminal , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Muerte , Demencia/terapia , Humanos , Casas de Salud , Cuidados Paliativos , Satisfacción del Paciente , Satisfacción Personal , Estudios Prospectivos , Singapur
2.
Ann Acad Med Singap ; 38(2): 113-20, 2009 Feb.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19271037

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: While the readmission rate from community hospitals is known, the factors affecting it are not. Our aim was to determine the factors predicting unplanned readmissions from community hospitals (CHs) to acute hospitals (AHs). MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was an observational prospective cohort study, involving 842 patients requiring post-acute rehabilitation in 2 CHs admitted from 3 AHs in Singapore. We studied the role of the Cumulative Illness Rating Scale (CIRS) organ impairment scores, the Mini-mental State Examination (MMSE) score, the Shah modified Barthel Index (BI) score, and the triceps skin fold thickness (TSFT) in predicting the rate of unplanned readmissions (UR), early unplanned readmissions (EUPR) and late unplanned readmissions (LUPR). We developed a clinical prediction rule to determine the risk of UR and EUPR. RESULTS: The rates of EUPR and LUPR were 7.6% and 10.3% respectively. The factors that predicted UR were the CIRS-heart score, the CIRS-haemopoietic score, the CIRS-endocrine / metabolic score and the BI on admission. The MMSE was predictive of EUPR. The TSFT and CIRS-liver score were predictive of LUPR. Upon receiver operator characteristics analysis, the clinical prediction rules for the prediction of EUPR and UR had areas under the curve of 0.745 and 0.733 respectively. The likelihood ratios of the clinical prediction rules for EUPR and UR ranged from 0.42 to 5.69 and 0.34 to 3.16 respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Patients who have UR can be identified by the admission BI, the MMSE, the TSFT and CIRS scores in the cardiac, haemopoietic, liver and endocrine/metabolic systems.


Asunto(s)
Hospitales Comunitarios/estadística & datos numéricos , Hospitales Especializados/estadística & datos numéricos , Readmisión del Paciente/tendencias , Enfermedad Aguda/terapia , Anciano , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos/estadística & datos numéricos , Masculino , Estudios Prospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , Índice de Severidad de la Enfermedad , Singapur
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA