Objective Most terminally ill patients and relatives prefer care and death to occur at home. However, in many cases patients die in hospital and the question arises whether social inequity in palliative care exists. The aim of this study was to analyse associations between dying at home and demographic and socioeconomic characteristics adjusted for healthcare utilisation among Danish cancer patients.
Method Population-based, cross-sectional register study in Aarhus County, Denmark. 599 deceased adults who died from cancer from 1 March to 30 November 2006 in a well-defined geographical area were identified. Based on unique personal identifier numbers, socioeconomic data and healthcare utilisation from different registers were retrieved and analysed.
Results Multivariate analysis showed that dying at home was negatively associated with, first, being either 50–59 (prevalence ratio (PR): 0.67 (95% CI 0.45 to 0.99)) or 70–79 years of age (PR: 0.83 (95% CI 0.70 to 0.99)) compared with being 80 years or above; second, a middle personal income compared with a high income (PR: 0.86 (95% CI 0.75 to 1.00)); and, third, being employed or having a leadership position compared with being unemployed/student/receiving social security (PR: 0.72 (95% CI 0.53 to 0.98)).
Conclusion The found socioeconomic differences in whether death occurred at home or at institutions indicate that age, income and social class must be taken into account when palliative care services engage in fulfilling preferences of dying at home. This may lead to more equality in the possibility of dying at home, despite differences in socioeconomic level.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Funding The study was funded by the Aarhus County Research Fund for the Clinical Development and Research in General Practice and across the Primary and Secondary Healthcare Sectors (4-01-3-04), the Danish National Research Foundation for Primary Care (585-457808), The Multipractice Study Committee (585-04/2072) and The Novo Nordic Foundation (12022)
Competing interests None.
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.