Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2013 Jun;41(6):1405-11.
doi: 10.1097/CCM.0b013e318287f289.

Hospital variation and temporal trends in palliative and end-of-life care in the ICU

Affiliations

Hospital variation and temporal trends in palliative and end-of-life care in the ICU

Thomas W DeCato et al. Crit Care Med. 2013 Jun.

Abstract

Objectives: Although studies have shown regional and interhospital variability in the intensity of end-of-life care, few data are available assessing variability in specific aspects of palliative care in the ICU across hospitals or interhospital variability in family and nurse ratings of this care. Recently, relatively high family satisfaction with ICU end-of-life care has prompted speculation that ICU palliative care has improved over time, but temporal trends have not been documented.

Design/setting: Retrospective cohort study of consecutive patients dying in the ICU in 13 Seattle-Tacoma-area hospitals between 2003 and 2008.

Measurements: We examined variability over time and among hospitals in satisfaction and quality of dying assessed by family, quality of dying assessed by nurses, and chart-based indicators of palliative care. We used regression analyses adjusting for patient, family, and nurse characteristics.

Main results: Medical charts were abstracted for 3,065 of 3,246 eligible patients over a 55-month period. There were significant differences between hospitals for all chart-based indicators (p < 0.001), family satisfaction (p < 0.001), family-rated quality of dying (p = 0.03), and nurse-rated quality of dying (p = 0.003). There were few significant changes in these measures over time, although we found a significant increase in pain assessments in the last 24 hours of life (p < 0.001) as well as decreased documentation of family conferences (p < 0.001) and discussion of prognosis (p = 0.020) in the first 72 hours in the ICU.

Conclusions: We found significant interhospital variation in ratings and delivery of palliative care, consistent with prior studies showing variation in intensity of care at the end of life. We did not find evidence of temporal changes in most aspects of palliative care, family satisfaction, or nurse/family ratings of the quality of dying. With the possible exception of pain assessment, there is little evidence that the quality of palliative care has improved over the time period studied.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00685893.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors have not disclosed any potential conflicts of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Variability in chart-based outcomes among hospitals. This figure shows the performance of each hospital on four of the chart-based indicators of palliative care (two covering the last 24 hr of life: no cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR), pain assessments; and two covering the first 72 hr in the ICU: family conferences and prognostic discussions). For the purposes of illustration, the hospitals were divided into those with a smaller number of deaths (A; n = 7) and those with a larger number of deaths (B; n = 6). Each hospital is represented by a different line showing that hospitals vary in their relative position compared to other hospitals.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Outcome measures by hospital over time. This figure shows the change in the expected percentage of pain assessments in the last 24 hr of life (A) and family conferences in the first 72 hr in the ICU (B) over time for each individual hospital and for the total sample average. On average, pain assessments significantly increased over the study period (p < 0.001), while family conferences significantly decreased (p < 0.001). The within-hospital lines are adjusted for patient characteristics; the summary line (average [AVG]) is adjusted for patient characteristics and for hospital.

Comment in

References

    1. Angus DC, Barnato AE, Linde-Zwirble WT, et al. Robert Wood Johnson Foundation ICU End-Of-Life Peer Group: Use of intensive care at the end of life in the United States: An epidemiologic study. Crit Care Med. 2004;32:638–643. - PubMed
    1. Wennberg JE, Fisher ES, Stukel TA, et al. Use of hospitals, physician visits, and hospice care during last six months of life among cohorts loyal to highly respected hospitals in the United States. BMJ. 2004;328:607. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Lin CY, Farrell MH, Lave JR, et al. Organizational determinants of hospital end-of-life treatment intensity. Med Care. 2009;47:524–530. - PMC - PubMed
    1. Barnato AE, Herndon MB, Anthony DL, et al. Are regional variations in end-of-life care intensity explained by patient preferences?: A Study of the US Medicare Population. Med Care. 2007;45:386–393. - PMC - PubMed
    1. The SUPPORT Principal Investigators: A controlled trial to improve care for seriously ill hospitalized patients: The study to understand prognoses and preferences for outcomes and risks of treatments (SUPPORT) JAMA. 1995;274:1591–1598. - PubMed

Publication types

MeSH terms

Associated data