Objective To describe the experience of dying in a US tertiary academic medical centre and to compare this experience with a historical decedent sample.
Design A retrospective, observational, chart audit study of adults (N=159) who died in hospital.
Setting Component hospitals of the Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center: Mary Hitchcock Memorial Hospital (MHMH), Lebanon, New Hampshire, and the affiliated Veteran's Affairs Medical Center (VAMC), White River Junction, Vermont.
Participants 159 hospitalised adult decedents comprising a random sample of 100 MHMH decedents and a total sample of 59 VAMC decedents.
Methods The authors compared end-of-life (EOL) care in decedents who had a palliative care consultation (PCC) with those who did not. An exploratory analysis compared the EOL care between the 2008 decedent sample and an historical decedent sample (N=104).
Results 63 of 159 inpatients received a PCC. Decedents receiving a PCC were less likely to die in an intensive care unit, had fewer invasive interventions (eg, intubation, assisted ventilation, dialysis, chemotherapy) and were more likely to have advance directives, do-not-resuscitate orders and comfort measures orders than those who did not receive a PCC. Higher rates of emotional and pastoral care were also noted. Compared with the historical sample, 2008 decedents had a higher rate of invasive interventions, but fewer invasive interventions were noted in the 2008 PCC subsample.
Conclusions Less invasive EOL care was observed in decedents who received a PCC. Ongoing monitoring of EOL care is critically important for hospital quality improvement programmes.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Funding This work was supported by the Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, NH, through a Medical Student Assistantship (PP); a Dartmouth-Hitchcock Palliative Medicine Fellowship (SS); and by NIH/NINR RO1 NR011871-01 (MB) and a National Palliative Care Research Center Career Award (MB).
Competing interests None.
Ethics approval Dartmouth College and Veterans Affairs Institutional Review Boards.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.