Burial or cremation? Factors associated with preferences among patients with cancer in Brazil: a cross-sectional study.

BACKGROUND: People living with life-limiting illnesses and their family caregivers consistently emphasize the importance of preparing for imminent death, with planned funerals being a common aspect of this preparation. Few studies have described the funeral rituals or post-mortem preferences of patients with cancer. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the percentage of patients with cancer who wish to be cremated and to identify the factors associated with this preference. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional study conducted at Barretos Cancer Hospital. METHODS: A total of 220 patients with cancer completed a Sociodemographic and Clinical Questionnaire, the Duke University Religiosity Index, and burial or cremation preferences. Binary Logistic Regression was performed to identify independent variables associated with cremation. RESULTS: Of the 220 patients, 25.0% preferred cremation and 71.4% preferred burial. Talks about death with family or close friends in their daily life (odds ratio, OR = 2.89; P = 0.021), patients that answered "other" (unsure, tends not be true and not true) for religious beliefs are what really lie behind my whole approach to life (OR = 20.34; P = 0.005), and education 9 to 11 years (OR = 3.15; P = 0.019) or ≥ 12 years (OR = 3.18; P = 0.024) were associated with cremation preference. CONCLUSION: Most patients with Cancer in Brazil prefer burial after death. Discussions about death, religious beliefs and involvement, and educational level seem to influence the preference for cremation. A deeper understanding of ritual funeral preferences and their associated factors may guide policies, services, and health teams in promoting the quality of dying and death.

Burial or cremation? Factors associated with preferences among patients with cancer in Brazil: a cross-sectional study

ABSTRACT BACKGROUND: People living with life-limiting illnesses and their family caregivers consistently emphasize the importance of preparing for imminent death, with planned funerals being a common aspect of this preparation. Few studies have described the funeral rituals or post-mortem preferences of patients with cancer. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the percentage of patients with cancer who wish to be cremated and to identify the factors associated with this preference. DESIGN AND SETTING: Cross-sectional study conducted at Barretos Cancer Hospital. METHODS: A total of 220 patients with cancer completed a Sociodemographic and Clinical Questionnaire, the Duke University Religiosity Index, and burial or cremation preferences. Binary Logistic Regression was performed to identify independent variables associated with cremation. RESULTS: Of the 220 patients, 25.0% preferred cremation and 71.4% preferred burial. Talks about death with family or close friends in their daily life (odds ratio, OR = 2.89; P = 0.021), patients that answered "other" (unsure, tends not be true and not true) for religious beliefs are what really lie behind my whole approach to life (OR = 20.34; P = 0.005), and education 9 to 11 years (OR = 3.15; P = 0.019) or ≥ 12 years (OR = 3.18; P = 0.024) were associated with cremation preference. CONCLUSION: Most patients with Cancer in Brazil prefer burial after death. Discussions about death, religious beliefs and involvement, and educational level seem to influence the preference for cremation. A deeper understanding of ritual funeral preferences and their associated factors may guide policies, services, and health teams in promoting the quality of dying and death.

Influence of advance directives on reducing aggressive measures during end-of-life cancer care: A systematic review.

CONTEXT: Although the literature recognizes the participation of patients in medical decisions as an important indicator of quality, there is a lack of consensus regarding the influence of advance directives (ADs) on reducing aggressive measures during end-of-life care involving cancer patients. OBJECTIVE: A systematic review was conducted to analyze the influence of ADs on reducing aggressive end-of-life care measures for cancer patients. METHOD: We searched the Medline, Embase, Web of Science, and Lilacs databases for studies published until March 2018 using the following keywords, without language restrictions: "advance directives," "living wills," "terminal care," "palliative care," "hospice care," and "neoplasms." Article quality was assessed using study quality assessment tools from the Department of Health and Human Services (NHLBI). RESULTS: A total of 1,489 studies were identified; 7 met the inclusion criteria. The studies were recently published (after 2014, 71.4%). Patients with ADs were more likely to die at the site of choice (n = 3) and received less chemotherapy in the last 30 days (n = 1). ADs had no impact on intensive care unit admission (n = 1) or hospitalization (n = 1). One study found an association between ADs and referral to palliative care, but other did not find the same result. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Of the seven articles found, four demonstrated effects of ADs on the reduction in aggressive measures at the end of life of cancer patients. Heterogeneity regarding study design and results and poor methodological quality are challenges when drawing conclusions.

Oncology palliative care: access barriers: bibliometric study.

OBJECTIVE: To perform a bibliometric analysis of studies that evaluated the barriers to access to cancer palliative care (PC). METHODS: This was a bibliometric review using MEDLINE; EMBASE; Web Of Science; LILACS and the Cochrane Library. A search was conducted with the terms Barriers, Palliative Care and Cancer. Articles whose objectives targeted barriers to access to PC were considered, regardless of the year of publication. The setting is articles published from 1987 to 2020. RESULTS: A total of 6158 articles were identified, of which 217 were eligible for analysis. The USA and UK being the countries with the largest number of articles on the subject (n=101, n=18, respectively). After expert analysis, the barriers were grouped into nine categories. CONCLUSIONS: Barriers related to symptom control were identified in 19% of the eligible articles, along with barriers related to health, which with 24% of occurrence in the articles, were the most frequently cited barriers. Countries which have implemented PC for some time were those with the greatest number of publications and in journals with the highest impact factors. Cross-sectional study design continues to be the most frequently used in publications.