Dataset Information

End-of-life care preferences of the general public and recommendations of healthcare providers: a nationwide survey in Japan.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:A better understanding of differences between the preferences of the general public and the recommendations of healthcare providers with regard to end-of-life (EOL) care may facilitate EOL discussion. METHODS:The aim of this study was to clarify differences between preferences of the general public and recommendations of healthcare providers with regard to treatment, EOL care, and life-sustaining treatment (LST) based on a hypothetical scenario involving a patient with advanced cancer. This study comprised exploratory post-hoc analyses of "The Survey of Public Attitude Towards Medical Care at the End of life", which was a population based, cross-sectional anonymous survey in Japan to investigate public attitudes toward medical care at the end of life. Persons living in Japan over 20?years old were randomly selected nationwide. Physicians, nurses, and care staff were recruited at randomly selected facilities throughout Japan. The general public data from the original study was combined to the data of healthcare providers in order to conduct exploratory post-hoc analyses. The preferences of the general public and recommendations of healthcare providers with regard to EOL care and LST was assessed based on the hypothetical scenario of an advanced cancer patient. RESULTS:All returned questionnaires were analyzed: 973 from the general public, 1039 from physicians, 1854 from nurses, and 752 from care staff (response rates of 16.2, 23.1, 30.9, and 37.6%, respectively). The proportion of the general public who wanted "chemotherapy or radiation", "ventilation", and "cardiopulmonary resuscitation" was significantly higher than the frequency of these options being recommended by physicians, nurses, and care staff, but the general public preference for "cardiopulmonary resuscitation" was significantly lower than the frequency of its recommendation by care staff. CONCLUSION:Regarding a hypothetical scenario for advanced cancer, the general public preferred more aggressive treatment and more frequent LST than that recommended by healthcare providers.

SUBMITTER: Hamano J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7093951 | biostudies-literature | 2020 Mar

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

End-of-life care preferences of the general public and recommendations of healthcare providers: a nationwide survey in Japan.

Hamano Jun J Hanari Kyoko K Tamiya Nanako N

BMC palliative care 20200324 1

<h4>Background</h4>A better understanding of differences between the preferences of the general public and the recommendations of healthcare providers with regard to end-of-life (EOL) care may facilitate EOL discussion.<h4>Methods</h4>The aim of this study was to clarify differences between preferences of the general public and recommendations of healthcare providers with regard to treatment, EOL care, and life-sustaining treatment (LST) based on a hypothetical scenario involving a patient with ...[more]

PMID: 32209096

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo examine the expectation of public healthcare providers/professionals (PHCPs) who are working closely with family medicine specialists (FMSs) at public health clinics.DesignCross-sectional study.SettingThis study is part of a larger national study on the perception of the Malaysian public healthcare professionals on FMSs.ParticipantsPHCPs from three categories of health facilities, namely hospitals, health clinics and health offices.Main outcome measuresQualitative analysis of written comments of respondents' expectation of FMSs.ResultsThe participants' response rate was 58% (780/1345) with an almost equal proportion from each public healthcare facility. We identified 21 subthemes for the 623 expectation comments. The six emerging themes are (1) need for more FMSs, (2) clinical roles and functions of FMSs, (3) administrative roles of FMSs, (4) contribution to community and public health, (5) attributes improvement and (6) research and audits. FMSs were expected to give attention to clinical duty. Delivering this responsibility with competence included having the latest medical knowledge in their own and others' medical disciplines, practising evidence-based medicine in prehospital and posthospital care, better supervision of staff and doctors under their care, fostering effective teamwork, communicating more often with hospital specialists and making appropriate referral. Expectations ranged from definite and strong for more FMSs at the health clinics to low expectation for FMSs' involvement in research; to mal-expectation on FMSs' involvement in community and public health programmes.ConclusionsThere were some remarkable differences in expectations on FMSs from the three different PHCPs. These ranged from being clinically competent and administratively available for patients and staff at the health clinics, to mal-expectations on FMSs to engage in public health affairs. Relevant parties, including FMSs themselves, could take appropriate self-improvement initiatives to enhance public practice of family medicine and patient care.Trial registration number nmrr id08-12-1167.

Project description:BackgroundCancer cachexia is a severe complication of advanced malignancy, with few therapeutic options. To promote interprofessional care for cancer cachexia, healthcare providers' needs should be addressed in detail. This pre-planned subgroup analysis of the Global Educational Needs Evaluation: a systemic interprofessional study in cancer cachexia (GENESIS-CC) survey aimed to identify barriers to interprofessional care of cancer cachexia in Japan.MethodsA nationwide survey was electronically conducted for healthcare providers in oncological or general healthcare facilities from January to March 2021 in Japan. The Japanese Regional Advisory Board developed a barrier scoring system with 33 from the 58 original survey items to quantify six domains of barriers: (1) lack of confidence, (2) lack of knowledge, (3) barriers in personal practice, (4) barriers in perception, (5) barriers in team practice and (6) barriers in education. The largest possible barrier score was set at 100 points. We compared the scores by profession.ResultsA total of 1227 valid responses were obtained from 302 (24.6%) physicians, 252 (20.5%) pharmacists, 236 (19.2%) nurses, 218 (17.8%) dietitians, 193 (15.7%) rehabilitation therapists and 26 (2.0%) other professionals. Overall, 460 (37.5%) were not very or at all confident about cancer cachexia care, 791 (84.1%) agreed or strongly agreed that care was influenced by reimbursement availability and 774 (81.9%) did not have cancer cachexia as a mandatory curriculum. The largest mean barrier score (± standard deviation) was 63.7 ± 31.3 for education, followed by 55.6 ± 21.8 for team practice, 43.7 ± 32.5 for knowledge, 42.8 ± 17.7 for perception and 36.5 ± 16.7 for personal practice. There were statistically significant interprofessional differences in all domains (P < 0.05), especially for pharmacists and nurses with the highest or second highest scores in most domains.ConclusionsThere is a need to improve the educational system and team practices of cancer cachexia for most Japanese healthcare providers, especially pharmacists and nurses. Our study suggests the need to reform the mandatory educational curriculum and reimbursement system on cancer cachexia to promote interprofessional care for cancer cachexia in Japan.

Project description:BackgroundLittle research has been conducted to explore variables associated with the healthcare providers' (HCPs) understanding and recommendation of human papillomavirus vaccine (HPV) since the vaccine was approved for use in China.MethodsA large-scale cross-sectional survey was conducted in southern China covering Guangdong, Guangxi, and Hainan provinces between April 2019 and October 2019. Firstly, descriptive analysis was used to access awareness, knowledge, barriers, and recommendations toward HPV vaccine among all participants. Multi-variable logistic regression was further applied to explore potential factors associated with awareness, acknowledgment of HPV vaccine, and recommendation behaviors toward HPV vaccine.Results2075 questionnaires were collected, and 2054 were included in the final analysis. In total, 77.9% of participants have heard of HPV vaccine and obtained sub-optimal HPV/HPV vaccine knowledge scores with a mean (SD) of 13.8 (3.5) out of a maximum score of 23. 68.1% HCPs reported that they have recommended HPV vaccine to others. Province and profession were the most significant characteristics associated with awareness, knowledge score, and recommendation behavior toward HPV vaccine. HCPs in Guangdong obtained a much better knowledge score [Mean (SD) = 15.5 (3.0)] and reported higher recommendation behavior (82.8%). Compare with HCPs from the Division of Expanded Program on Immunization (DEPI), Community Health Center (CHC), and obstetrician-gynecologists, other non-HPV closely related professions showed a less competent knowledge of HPV and HPV vaccine [Mean (SD) = 12.5 (3.0)] and lower frequency of recommendation behavior on vaccination (58.1%). The difference in HPV vaccine knowledge among different professions was concentrating on the items about clinical pathology of HPV and the practical aspects of HPV vaccine. Educational level and title were also closely associated with their knowledge of HPV and its vaccine. Besides, knowledge scores independently determined with recommendation behavior (OR = 1.18, 95% CI 1.13-1.23).ConclusionKnowledge level of HPV and HPV vaccine as well as recommendation behavior toward HPV vaccine were relatively lower in southern China and differed significantly between provinces. Profession-specific gaps on the knowledge level of HPV and HPV vaccine emphasized the need for targeted education and training to improve HCPs' engagement in the promotion of the HPV vaccine.

Project description:BACKGROUND: It is ethically controversial whether medical doctors are morally permitted to ration the care of their patients at the bedside. To explore whether general practitioners in fact do ration in this manner we conducted a study within primary care in the Danish public healthcare system. The purpose of the study was to measure the extent to which general practitioners (GPs) would be willing to factor in cost-quality trade-offs when prescribing medicine, and to discover whether, and if so to what extent, they believe that patients should be informed about this. METHODS: Postal survey of 600 randomly selected Danish GPs, of which 330 responded to the questionnaire. The Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS, version 14.0) was used to produce general descriptive statistics. Significance was calculated with the McNemar and the chi-square test. The main outcome measures of the study were twofold: an assessment of the proportion of GPs who, in a mainly hypothetical setting, would consider cost-quality trade-offs relevant to their clinical decision-making given their economic impact on the healthcare system; and a measure of the extent to which they would disclose this information to patients. RESULTS: In the hypothetical setting 95% of GPs considered cost-quality trade-offs relevant to their clinical decision-making given the economic impact of such trade-offs on the healthcare system. In all 90% stated that this consideration had been relevant in clinical decision-making within the last month. In the hypothetical setting 55% would inform their patients that they considered a cost-quality trade-off relevant to their clinical decisions given the economic impact of such trade-offs on the healthcare system. The most common reason (68%) given for not wanting to inform patients about this matter was the belief that the information would not prove useful to patients. In the hypothetical setting cost-quality trade-offs were considered relevant significantly more often in connection with concerns about costs to the patient (86%) than they were in connection with concerns about costs to the healthcare system (55%; p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Although readiness to consider cost-quality trade-offs relevant to clinical decisions is prevalent among GPs in Denmark, only half of GPs would disclose to patients that they consider this relevant to their clinical decision-making. The results of this study raise two important ethical problems. First, under Danish law physicians are required to inform patients about all equal treatments. The fact that only a few GPs would inform their patients about all of the relevant treatments therefore seems to contravene Danish law. Second, it is ethically controversial that physicians act as economic gatekeepers.

Project description:BackgroundPatient feedback after contact with a hospital is regarded as an important source of information for the improvement of local healthcare services. Routine patient surveys are in widespread use to obtain such feedback. While general principles for the composition of this kind of surveys have been described in the literature, it is unknown which method of contact and topics of feedback are important to patients in postcontact healthcare surveys.Material and methodsWe invited 2931 consecutive patients who had in- or outpatient contact with the Department of Orthopaedics and Traumatology at the University Hospital Basel to an anonymous survey. They were asked whether they were generally in favor of feedback surveys. They also had the opportunity to state their preferred form of contact (text message, app, email, online or letter) and provide up to three topics that they regarded as specifically important in patient surveys.ResultsA total of 745 patients participated in the survey (25.4%), of these 61.9% expressed the preference to be surveyed, and 69.1% selected `letter' as one of the preferred forms of contact. Favoring only `letter' contact increased substantially with age. Overall 54.6% of patients stated at least one topic that they wished to give feedback on. The most frequent topics were related to treatment and rather general aspects regarding staff and overall impression. The wish to include suggestions for improvements was rarely mentioned as specific topic.ConclusionsThe majority of patients seem to be rather indifferent to the existence and content of patient surveys. They mention a wide range of topics from general to specific ones, but do not express interest in the opportunity to suggest changes. There is a need to effectively engage patients in healthcare planning using new approaches to obtain valuable feedback on patients' hospital stay and contact experiences. These new approaches should ideally be more informative and cost-effective than the current practice.

Project description:Antibiotic resistance is one of the biggest threats to global public health. Misuse of antibiotics has never been investigated on a nationwide scale among the general public in Malaysia. This study aimed to identify sociodemographic and knowledge factors associated with inappropriate use of antibiotics in the Malaysian context to inform the development of interventions to mitigate inappropriate antibiotic use. We conducted computer-assisted telephone interviews (CATI) between June 2019 and December 2019. The telephone numbers were randomly generated from the electronic residential telephone directory of all 13 states and 3 Federal Territories in Malaysia. The survey consisted of questions on demographics, knowledge about antibiotics and antibiotic resistance (53 items), and practices of antibiotic use (16 questions). A total of 864 complete responses were received. Pronounced erroneous beliefs that antibiotics are effective against infections caused by viruses and that antibiotics can speed up recovery from coughs and colds were evident. The proportions that were aware of the terms 'drug resistance', 'antimicrobial resistance', and 'superbugs' were low. The mean and standard deviation (SD) for the antibiotic knowledge score was 23.7 (SD ±9.25; range 0 to 50) out of a possible score of 52. Regarding antibiotic practices, a considerable proportion reported non-adherence to recommended doses. The mean and SD for the antibiotic practices score was 37.9 (SD ± 6.5; range 17 to 47) out of a possible score of 48. Participants who earned an average monthly household income of MYR1001-3000 (OR 1.61, 95% CI 1.04-2.50) were more likely to report higher antibiotic practice scores than those with <MYR1000. Participants with tertiary education attainment reported higher antibiotic practice scores (OR 1.99; 95%CI 1.02-3.91) than those with primary school and below. High antibiotic knowledge scores (OR 3.94; 95% CI 2.71-5.73) were associated with higher antibiotic practice scores. Inappropriate antibiotic use is influenced by demographics and antibiotic knowledge. This study calls for education interventions focused on the lower socio-economic status population to increase awareness and to promote appropriate antibiotic use.

Dataset Information

End-of-life care preferences of the general public and recommendations of healthcare providers: a nationwide survey in Japan.

Publications

End-of-life care preferences of the general public and recommendations of healthcare providers: a nationwide survey in Japan.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets