IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/geronb/v73y2018i4p687-695..html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Does Religiosity Account for Lower Rates of Advance Care Planning by Older African Americans?

Author

Listed:
  • Catheryn S Koss

Abstract

ObjectivesAdvance care planning (ACP) is associated with higher quality care at the end of life and increased odds of receiving hospice care and of dying at home. Older African Americans are less likely to complete advance directives (ADs) or discuss life-sustaining treatment preferences. This study examined whether religiosity accounts for race disparities.MethodAnalyses were conducted with Health and Retirement Study data (1,180 African Americans, 5,681 Whites). Two forms of ACP were regressed on race, five measures of religiosity, and demographic, health, and health care covariates.ResultsWhites were twice as likely to engage in ACP. Including religiosity predictors did not close these gaps. Frequency of service attendance was positively associated with AD completion for both White and African American participants. Relationships between religious affiliation and advance care discussion varied by race. For White participants only, more frequent prayer was associated with higher odds of advance care discussion.DiscussionAlthough religiosity is often proposed as a reason for low rates of ACP among African Americans, religiosity measures did not explain race differences. Distinct aspects of religiosity were associated with ACP both negatively and positively, and these relationships varied by type of ACP and by race.

Suggested Citation

  • Catheryn S Koss, 2018. "Does Religiosity Account for Lower Rates of Advance Care Planning by Older African Americans?," The Journals of Gerontology: Series B, The Gerontological Society of America, vol. 73(4), pages 687-695.
  • Handle: RePEc:oup:geronb:v:73:y:2018:i:4:p:687-695.
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/geronb/gbw155
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    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:oup:geronb:v:73:y:2018:i:4:p:687-695.. 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: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/psychsocgerontology .

    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.