Suppr超能文献

姑息治疗中对护理地点和死亡地点的偏好:这是不同的问题吗?

Preference for place of care and place of death in palliative care: are these different questions?

作者信息

Agar M, Currow D C, Shelby-James T M, Plummer J, Sanderson C, Abernethy A P

机构信息

Department of Palliative and Supportive Services, Flinders University, Daw Park, South Australia.

出版信息

Palliat Med. 2008 Oct;22(7):787-95. doi: 10.1177/0269216308092287. Epub 2008 Aug 28.

Abstract

Place of death is at times suggested as an outcome for palliative care services. This study aimed to describe longitudinal preferences for place of care and place of death over time for patients and their caregivers. Longitudinal paired data of patient/caregiver dyads from a prospective unblinded cluster randomised control trial were used. Patients and caregivers were separately asked by the palliative care nurse their preference at that time for place of care and place of death. Longitudinal changes over time for both questions were mapped; patterns of agreement (patient and caregiver; and preference for place of death when last asked and actual placed of death) were analysed with kappa statistics. Seventy-one patient/caregiver dyads were analysed. In longitudinal preferences, preferences for both the place of care (asked a mean of >6 times) and place of death (asked a mean of >4 times) changed for patients (28% and 30% respectively) and caregivers (31% and 30%, respectively). In agreement between patients and caregivers, agreement between preference of place of care and preferred place of death when asked contemporaneously for patients and caregivers was low [56% (kappa 0.33) and 36% (kappa 0.35) respectively]. In preference versus actual place of death, preferences were met for 37.5% of participants for home death; 62.5% for hospital; 76.9% for hospice and 63.6% for aged care facility. This study suggests that there are two conversations: preference for current place of care and preference for care at the time of death. Place of care is not a euphemism for place of death; and further research is needed to delineate these. Patient and caregiver preferences may not change simultaneously. Implications of any mismatch between actual events and preferences need to be explored.

摘要

死亡地点有时被视为姑息治疗服务的一项成果。本研究旨在描述患者及其照料者随时间推移对护理地点和死亡地点的长期偏好。使用了来自一项前瞻性非盲群随机对照试验的患者/照料者二元组的纵向配对数据。姑息治疗护士分别询问患者和照料者当时对护理地点和死亡地点的偏好。绘制了这两个问题随时间的纵向变化;使用卡方统计分析了一致性模式(患者和照料者;以及最后一次询问时对死亡地点的偏好与实际死亡地点)。分析了71个患者/照料者二元组。在长期偏好方面,患者(分别为28%和30%)和照料者(分别为31%和30%)对护理地点(平均询问>6次)和死亡地点(平均询问>4次)的偏好均发生了变化。在患者和照料者的一致性方面,当同时询问患者和照料者时,护理地点偏好与首选死亡地点之间的一致性较低[分别为56%(卡方0.33)和36%(卡方0.35)]。在偏好与实际死亡地点方面,37.5%的参与者在家中死亡的偏好得到满足;在医院为62.5%;在临终关怀机构为76.9%;在老年护理机构为63.6%。本研究表明存在两种对话:对当前护理地点的偏好和对死亡时护理的偏好。护理地点不是死亡地点的委婉说法;需要进一步研究来阐明这些。患者和照料者的偏好可能不会同时改变。需要探讨实际事件与偏好之间任何不匹配的影响。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验