Table 1 Comparison of characteristics of RRS users and non-users
From: Impact of a hospice rapid response service on preferred place of death, and costs
Intervention group N = 688 (%) | Non-user (N = 441) | User (N = 247) | P-value | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
Age at death | (Mean, SD) | 75.10 (12.21) | 75.10 (10.22) | T test 0.985 |
Days in study | (Mean, SD) | 69.1 (76.50) | 73.1 (81.23) | T test 0.521 |
Area | 1 Canterbury | 229 (51.9) | 131 (53.0) | |
2 Thanet | 158 (35.8) | 92 (37.2) | ||
3 Ashford | 54 (12.2) | 24 (9.7) | ||
Sex | Male | 245 (55.6) | 143 (57.9) | χ2 0.553 |
Female | 196 (44.4) | 104 (42.1) | ||
Initial PPDa | Home | 227 (51.5) | 190 (76.9) | χ2 < 0.0005 |
Care Home | 47 (10.7) | 2 (0.8) | ||
Hospice | 158 (35.8) | 52 (21.1) | ||
Hospital | 4 (0.9) | 0 (0) | ||
Other | 5 (1.1) | 3 (1.2) | ||
Final PPD | Home | 221 (50.1) | 184 (74.5) | χ2 < 0.0005 |
Care Home | 47 (10.7) | 3 (1.2) | ||
Hospice | 164 (37.2) | 58 (23.5) | ||
Hospital | 4 (0.9) | 0 (0) | ||
Other | 5 (1.1) | 2 (0.8) | ||
APDa | Home | 114 (26.3) | 156 (63.2) | χ2 < 0.0005 |
N = 434 non-users | Care Home | 65 (15.0) | 11 (4.5) | |
Hospice | 200 (46.1) | 61 (24.7) | ||
Hospital | 55 (12.7) | 19 (7.7) | ||
Residential situation | At Home not alone | 218 (58.8) | 164 (76.3) | χ2 < 0.0005 |
N = 371 non-users | At home alone | 103 (27.8) | 48 (22.3) | |
N = 215 users | Residential care | 50 (13.5) | 3 (1.4) | |
Achieving PPD (using initial PPD) | Yes | 257 (59.2) | 171 (69.2) | χ2 0.009 |
N = 434 non-users | No | 177 (40.8) | 76 (30.8) | |