Statistics from Altmetric.com
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.
Understanding the preferred place of death (PPoD) for patients with advanced cancer is an important indicator of quality of death and one of the criteria for a ‘good death’.1 Home represents the PPoD for most patients with cancer.2 However, this preference may not be shared by everyone, especially for patients suffering from severe and uncontrolled physical and psychological symptoms, unfavourable social or financial status, and lack of social and familiar support.3 PPoD is unique to each person and can be influenced by specific determinants such as demographic characteristics, disease-related factors and psychological factors, along with social, economic and cultural contexts that vary across diverse cultures and countries.2
The aim of this study was to determine the predictors associated with PPoD and subjective perceptions about such preferences in Brazilian patients with cancer.
We conducted a primary analysis of data (cross-sectional) derived from the first phase of a larger, prospective, longitudinal study. Recruitment of patients was conducted between February 2019 and July 2021 at Barretos Cancer Hospital (São Paulo/Brazil). Patient eligibility criteria included ≥18 years old, incurable cancer, undergoing systemic palliative treatment and/or individualised palliative care (PC), life expectancy >3 and ≤12 months, performance status ≤3, full cognitive capacity and coherent communication skills. A written consent was obtained prior to participation in this study.
Interviews were face to face and carried out by an experienced research nurse. The patient’s PPoD was obtained through an open-ended question in the PPoD questionnaire: ‘Think about your life: your family, your home, your financial …
Contributors Design: TCdOV, CEP, BSRP and MJ. Data collection: TCdOV. Statistical analysis: TCdOV, CEP and BSRP. Writing and revision: TCdOV, CEP, BSRP and MJ.
Funding TCOV received an individual PhD’s degree scholarship from the São Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP grant number 2018/08728-7).
Competing interests None declared.
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.