Cargando…
Life-Sustaining Treatment States in Korean Cancer Patients after Enforcement of Act on Decisions on Life-Sustaining Treatment for Patients at the End of Life
PURPOSE: In Korea, the “Act on Hospice and Palliative Care and Decisions on Life-sustaining Treatment for Patients at the End of Life” was enacted on February 4, 2018. This study was conducted to analyze the current state of life-sustaining treatment decisions based on National Health Insurance Serv...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Korean Cancer Association
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8524027/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34082495 http://dx.doi.org/10.4143/crt.2021.325 |
Sumario: | PURPOSE: In Korea, the “Act on Hospice and Palliative Care and Decisions on Life-sustaining Treatment for Patients at the End of Life” was enacted on February 4, 2018. This study was conducted to analyze the current state of life-sustaining treatment decisions based on National Health Insurance Service (NHIS) data after the law came into force. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The data of 173,028 cancer deaths were extracted from NHIS qualification data between November 2015 and January 2019. RESULTS: The number of cancer deaths complied with the law process was 14,438 of 54,635 cases (26.4%). The rate of patient self-determination was 49.0%. The patients complying with the law process have used a hospice center more frequently (28% vs. 14%). However, the rate of intensive care unit (ICU) admission was similar between the patients who complied with and without the law process (ICU admission, 23% vs. 21%). There was no difference in the proportion of patients who had undergone mechanical ventilation and hemodialysis in the comparative analysis before and after the enforcement of the law and the analysis according to the compliance with the law. The patients who complied with the law process received cardiopulmonary resuscitation at a lower rate. CONCLUSION: The law has positive effects on the rate of life-sustaining treatment decision by patient’s determination. However, there was no sufficient effect on the withholding or withdrawing of life-sustaining treatment, which could protect the patient from unnecessary or harmful interventions. |
---|