Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-16T14:26:57.607Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Planning for End-of-Life Care: Findings from the Canadian Study of Health and Aging*

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  31 March 2010

Douglas D. Garrett ,
Holly Tuokko ,
Kelli I. Stajduhar ,
Joan Lindsay  and
Sharon Buehler
Douglas D. Garrett
Affiliation:
Rotman Research Institute, Baycrest Department of Psychology, University of Toronto
Holly Tuokko*
Affiliation:
Centre on Aging, University of Victoria
Kelli I. Stajduhar
Affiliation:
Centre on Aging, University of Victoria
Joan Lindsay
Affiliation:
University of Ottawa
Sharon Buehler
Affiliation:
Memorial University of Newfoundland
*
Requests for offprints should be sent to:/Les demandes de tirés-à-part doivent être adressées à: Holly A. Tuokko, Ph.D., RPsych., Professor, Centre on Aging, Sedgewick Building Room A104, University of Victoria, PO Box 1700 STN CSC, Victoria, BC V8W 2Y2, (htuokko@uvic.ca)
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Steps involved in formalizing end-of-life care preferences and factors related to these steps are unclear in the literature. Using data from the third wave of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging (CSHA-3), we examined the relations between demographic and health predictors, on the one hand, and three outcomes, on the other (whether participants had thought about, discussed, or formalized their end-of-life preferences), and considered, as well, whether relations existed among the three outcomes. Canadian region of residence, female gender, and more years of education predicted having thought about preferences; region of residence, female gender, and lack of cognitive impairment predicted discussion of preferences; and region of residence and not being married predicted whether formal documents were in place. Ontario residents were most likely to have thought about, discussed, and formalized their preferences, whereas Atlantic residents were least likely to. Finally, having thought about preferences was associated with discussion, and having thought about and having discussed preferences were each associated with formalization of preferences. These findings are in keeping with the position that Advance Directives (AD) execution is a multi-stage process. A better understanding of this process may prove useful for the development of interventions to promote planning for end-of-life care.

Résumé

Les étapes utilisées pour l'officialisation des préférences en matière de soins en fin de vie et les facteurs en rapport avec ces étapes sont flous dans la documentation. À l'aide des données de la troisième phase de l'Étude sur la santé et le vieillissement au Canada (ESVC-3), nous avons examiné les relations entre les prédicteurs démographiques et en matière de santé, et les trois résultats (à savoir si les participants avaient réfléchi à leurs préférences de fin de vie, s'ils en avaient discuté, ou s'ils les avaient officialisées), et s'il y avait des relations entre les trois résultats. La région de résidence au Canada, le sexe féminin, et davantage d'années de scolarité étaient des facteurs associés à des personnes ayant réfléchi à leurs préférences. La région de résidence, le sexe féminin, et le manque de déficience cognitive étaient associés aux discussions en matière de préférences, et la région de résidence et le fait de ne pas avoir de conjoint étaient associés au dépôt de documents officiels. Les résidents de l'Ontario étaient les plus enclins à avoir réfléchi à leurs préférences, à en avoir discuté, et à les avoir officialisées, tandis que les résidents des Maritimes étaient les moins enclins à y avoir pensé et à avoir agi en conséquence. Enfin, avoir réfléchi à leurs préférences était associé au fait d'en discuter, et y avoir réfléchi et en avoir discuté étaient chacun associés à l'officialisation des préférences. Ces résultats correspondent au postulat que l'exécution du mandat (directive par procuration) est un processus comportant plusieurs étapes. Avoir une meilleure idée de ce processus peut se révéler utile lors de l'élaboration d'interventions visant à promouvoir la planification des soins en fin de vie.

Keywords

vieillissementfin de viepréférences en matière de soinsmandat (directive par procuration)documents officielsCanadiendifférences régionalesagingend-of-lifecare preferencesadvance directivesformal documentsCanadianregional differences
Type
Articles
Information
Canadian Journal on Aging / La Revue canadienne du vieillissement , Volume 27 , Issue 1 , Spring/Printemps 2008 , pp. 11 - 21
Copyright
Copyright © Canadian Association on Gerontology 2008

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Footnotes

*

Phases 1 and 2 of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging core study were funded by the Seniors' Independence Research Program, through Health Canada's National Health Research and Development Program (NHRDP project #6606-3954-MC(S)); supplementary funding for analysis of the caregiver component was provided by the Medical Research Council. Additional funding was provided by Pfizer Canada Incorporated, through the Medical Research Council/Pharmaceutical Manufacturers Association of Canada Health Activity Program, NHRDP (project #6603-1417-302(R)), by Bayer Incorporated, and by the British Columbia Health Research Foundation (projects #38 (93-2) and #34 (96-1)). Core funding for Phase 3 was obtained from the Canadian Institutes for Health Research (CIHR grant #MOP-42530); supplementary funding for the caregiver component was obtained from CIHR grant #MOP-43945. Additional funding was provided by Merck-Frosst and by Janssen-Ortho, Inc. The study was coordinated through the University of Ottawa and Health Canada. Douglas D. Garrett is supported by a graduate scholarship from the Natural Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada and the Annie Kishenblatt Award in Gerontology from the Toronto Rehabilitation Institute. A research personnel award from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research, Institute of Aging (Senior Investigator Award) supported Dr. Tuokko in the preparation of this manuscript. At the time of this investigation, Dr. Stajduhar was supported with post-doctoral funding from the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research (MSFHR). Currently, Dr. Stajduhar is supported by a New Investigator Award from the Canadian Institutes for Health Research and a Scholar Award from the Michael Smith Foundation for Health Research.

References

American Psychiatric Association (1987). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed., rev.). Washington, DS: Author.Google Scholar
Advance directives (editorial) (1992). Lancet, 340, 1321–1322.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Aickin, M., & Gensler, H. (1996). Adjusting for multiple testing when reporting research results: The Bonferroni vs Holm methods. American Journal of Public Health, 86, 726–728.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Ajzen, I. (1991). The theory of planned behavior. Organizational Behavior and Human Decision Processes, 50, 179–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Alberta. Personal Directives Act, R.S.A. 2000. c. P-6.Google Scholar
Bradley, E.H., Peiris, V., & Wetle, T. (1998). Discussions about end-of-life care in nursing homes. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 46, 1235–1241.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Braun, K.L., Onaka, A.T., & Horiuchi, B.Y. (2001). Advance directive completion rates and end-of-life preferences in Hawaii. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 49, 1708–1713.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
British Columbia. Representation Agreement Act, R.S.B.C. 1996. c. 405.Google Scholar
Browne, A., & Sullivan, B. (2006). Advance directives in Canada. Cambridge Quarterly of Healthcare Ethics (CQ), 15, 256–260.Google ScholarPubMed
Canadian Study of Health and Aging Working Group (1994). Canadian Study of Health and Aging: Study methods and prevalence of dementia. Canadian Medical Association Journal, 150, 899–913.Google Scholar
Carstairs, S., & Beaudoin, G.A. (Chairs), Subcommittee to update “Of Life and Death” of the Standing Senate Committee on Social Affairs. (2000). Quality end-of-life care: The right of every Canadian—Final report. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services Canada.Google Scholar
Covinsky, K.E., Fuller, J.D., Yaffe, K., Johnston, C.B., Hamel, M.B., Lynn, J., et al. (2000). Communication and decision-making in seriously ill patients: Findings of the SUPPORT project. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 48, S187–S193.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cramer, K., Tuokko, H., & Evans, D. (2001). Extending autonomy for health care preferences in late life. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 8, 213–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ditto, P.H., Smucker, W.D., Danks, J.H., Jacobson, J.A., Houts, R.M., Fagerlin, A., et al. (2003). Stability of older adults' preferences for life-sustaining medical treatment. Health Psychology, 22, 605–615.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gamble, E.R., McDonald, P.J., & Lichstein, P.R. (1991). Knowledge, attitudes, and behavior of elderly persons regarding living wills. Archives of Internal Medicine, 151, 277–280.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Golin, C.E., Wenger, N.S., Liu, H., Dawson, N.V., Teno, J.M., Desbiens, N.A., et al. (2000). A prospective study of patient–physician communication about resuscitation. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 48, S52–S60.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Havens, G.A.D. (2000). Difference in the execution/nonexecution of advance directives by community dwelling adults. Research in Nursing and Health, 23, 319–333.3.0.CO;2-6>CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Havens, G.A.D. (2001). A practical approach to the process of measurement in nursing. Clinical Nurse Specialist, 15, 146–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
High, D.M. (1991). A new myth about families of older people? Gerontologist, 31, 611–618.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
High, D.M. (1993). Why are elderly people not using advance directives? Journal of Aging and Health, 5, 497–515.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Hofmann, J.C., Wenger, N.S., Davis, R.B., Teno, J., Connors, A.F., Desbiens, N., et al. (1997). Patient preferences for communication with physicians about end-of-life decisions. Annals of Internal Medicine, 127, 1–12.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Holm, S. (1979). A simple sequentially rejective multiple test procedure. Scandinavian Journal of Statistics, 6, 65–70.Google Scholar
Hopp, F.P. (2000). Preferences for surrogate decision makers, informal communication, and advance directives among community-dwelling elders: Results from a national study. Gerontologist, 40, 449–457.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Inman, L. (2002). Advance directives: Why community-based older adults do not discuss their wishes. Journal of Gerontological Nursing, 28, 40–46.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kahana, B., Dan, A., Kahana, E., & Kercher, K. (2004). The personal and social context of planning for end-of-life care. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 52, 1163–1167.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Levin, J.R., Wenger, N.S., Ouslander, J.G., Zellman, G., Schnelle, J.F., Buchanen, J.L., et al. (1999). Life-sustaining treatment decisions for nursing home residents: Who discusses, who decides and what is decided? Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 47, 82–87.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lo, B., McLeod, G.A., & Saika, G. (1986). Patient attitudes to discussing life-sustaining treatment. Archives of internal medicine, 146, 1613–1615.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Marbella, A.M., Desbiens, N.A., Mueller-Rizner, N., & Layde, P.M. (1998). Surrogates' agreement with patients' resuscitation preferences: Effect of age, relationship, and SUPPORT intervention—Study to understand prognoses and preferences for outcomes and risks of treatment. Journal of Critical Care, 13, 140–145.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McAuley, W.J., & Travis, S.S. (2003). Advance care planning among residents in long-term care. American Journal of Hospice and Palliative Care, 20, 353–359.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
McDowell, I., Xi, G., Lindsay, J., & Tuokko, H. (2004). Canadian Study of Health and Aging: Study description and patterns of early cognitive decline. Aging, Neuropsychology, and Cognition, 11, 149–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moody, L.E., Small, B.J., & Jones, C.B. (2002). Advance directives preferences of functionally and cognitively impaired nursing home residents in the United States. Journal of Applied Gerontology, 21, 103–118.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moore, C.D., & Sherman, S.R. (1999). Factors that influence elders' decisions to formulate advance directives. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 31, 21–39.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nova Scotia. Medical Consent Act, R.S.N.S. 1989. c. 279.Google Scholar
Ontario. Substitute Decisions Act, (1992). S.O. 1992. c. 30.Google Scholar
Patient Self-Determination Act, 42 U.S.C. ss. 1395cc (1990).Google Scholar
Patterson, S.L., Baker, M., & Maeck, J.P. (1993). Durable powers of attorney: Issues of gender and health care decision-making. Journal of Gerontological Social Work, 21, 161–177.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Newfoundland. Advance Health Care Directives Act, S.N.L. 1995. c. A–4.1.Google Scholar
Prochaska, J.O., & Velicer, W.F. (1997). The transtheoretical model of health behavior change. American Journal of Health Promotion, 12, 38–48.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Quebec. Civil Code of Quebec, S.Q. 1991. c. 64.Google Scholar
Rosnick, C.B., & Reynolds, S.L. (2003). Thinking ahead: Factors associated with executing advance directives. Journal of Aging and Health, 15, 409–429.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sansone, P., & Phillips, M. (1995). Advance directives for elderly people: Worthwhile cause or wasted effort? Social Work, 40, 397–401.Google ScholarPubMed
Senate of Canada (1995). Of life and death: Report of the special Senate committee on euthanasia and assisted suicide. Ottawa: Minister of Supply and Services Canada.Google Scholar
Shaffer, J.P. (1995). Multiple hypothesis testing. Annual Review of Psychology, 46, 561–584.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sulmasy, D.P., Terry, P.B., Weisman, C.S., Miller, D.J., Stallings, R.Y., Vettese, M.A., et al. (1998). The accuracy of substituted judgments in patients with terminal diagnoses. Annals of Internal Medicine, 128, 621–629.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sutton, S. (2002). Using social cognition models to develop health behavior interventions: Problems and assumptions. In Rutter, D., & Quine, L. (Eds.), Intervention and Research with Social Cognitive Models. Buckingham, UK: Open University Press.Google Scholar
Teng, E.L., & Chui, H.C. (1987). The Modified Mini-Mental State (3MS) examination. Journal of Clinical Psychiatry, 48, 314–318.Google ScholarPubMed
Teno, J., Lynn, J., Wenger, N., Phillips, R.S., Murphy, D.P., Connors, A.F., et al. (1997). Advance directives for seriously ill hospitalized patients: Effectiveness with the patient self-determination ACT and the SUPPORT intervention. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 45, 500–507.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Tuokko, H., Kristjansson, E., & Miller, J. (1995). Neuropsychological detection of dementia: An overview of the neuropsychological component of the Canadian Study of Health and Aging. Journal of Clinical and Experimental Neuropsychology, 17, 352–373.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
United Nations (1995). World population prospects: The 1994 revision. New York: Author.Google Scholar
Wenger, N.S., Phillips, R.S., Teno, J.M., Oye, R.K., Dawson, N.V., Liu, H., et al. (2000). Physician understanding of patient resuscitation preferences: Insights and clinical implications. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 48, S44–S51.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed