IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0150686.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Death and the Oldest Old: Attitudes and Preferences for End-of-Life Care - Qualitative Research within a Population-Based Cohort Study

Author

Listed:
  • Jane Fleming
  • Morag Farquhar
  • Cambridge City over-75s Cohort (CC75C) study collaboration
  • Carol Brayne
  • Stephen Barclay

Abstract

Introduction: Increasing longevity means more people will be dying in very old age, but little is known about the preferences of the ‘oldest old’ regarding their care at the end of life. Aims: To understand very old people’s preferences regarding care towards the end of life and attitudes towards dying, to inform policy and practice. Methods: Qualitative data collection for n = 42 population-based cohort study participants aged 95–101 (88% women, 42% in long-term-care): topic-guided interviews with n = 33 participants and n = 39 proxy informants, most with both (n = 30: 4 jointly + separate interviews for 26 dyads). Results: Death was a part of life: these very old people mainly live day-to-day. Most were ready to die, reflecting their concerns regarding quality of life, being a nuisance, having nothing to live for and having lived long enough. Contrasting views were rare exceptions but voiced firmly. Most were not worried about death itself, but concerned more about the dying process and impacts on those left behind; a peaceful and pain-free death was a common ideal. Attitudes ranged from not wanting to think about death, through accepting its inevitable approach to longing for its release. Preferring to be made comfortable rather than have life-saving treatment if seriously ill, and wishing to avoid hospital, were commonly expressed views. There was little or no future planning, some consciously choosing not to. Uncertainty hampered end-of-life planning even when death was expected soon. Some stressed circumstances, such as severe dependency and others’ likely decision-making roles, would influence choices. Carers found these issues harder to raise but felt they would know their older relatives’ preferences, usually palliative care, although we found two discrepant views. Conclusions: This study’s rare data show ≥95-year-olds are willing to discuss dying and end-of-life care but seldom do. Formal documentation of wishes is extremely rare and may not be welcome. Although being “ready to die” and preferring a palliative approach predominated, these preferences cannot be assumed.

Suggested Citation

  • Jane Fleming & Morag Farquhar & Cambridge City over-75s Cohort (CC75C) study collaboration & Carol Brayne & Stephen Barclay, 2016. "Death and the Oldest Old: Attitudes and Preferences for End-of-Life Care - Qualitative Research within a Population-Based Cohort Study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 11(4), pages 1-25, April.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0150686
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0150686
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0150686
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0150686&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0150686?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0150686. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.