Suppr超能文献

综述:临终和死亡质量:措施的系统综述。

Review: the quality of dying and death: a systematic review of measures.

机构信息

Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Princess Margaret Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada.

出版信息

Palliat Med. 2010 Mar;24(2):127-44. doi: 10.1177/0269216309351783. Epub 2010 Jan 19.

Abstract

To determine whether modern medicine is facilitating 'good' deaths, appropriate measures of the quality of dying and death must be developed and utilized. The purpose of this paper is to identify quality of dying and death measurement tools and to determine their quality. MEDLINE (1950-2008), Healthstar (1966-2008), and CINAHL (1982-2008) were searched using keyword terms 'quality of dying/death' and 'good/bad death'. Papers that described a quality of dying and death measure or that aimed to measure the quality of dying and death were selected for review. The evaluation criteria included a description of the measure development (validated or ad hoc), the provision of a definition of quality of dying and death, an empirical basis for the measure, the incorporation of multiple domains and the subjective nature of the quality of dying and death construct, and responsiveness to change. Eighteen measures met the selection criteria. Six were published with some description of the development process and 12 were developed ad hoc. Less than half were based on an explicit definition of quality of dying and death and even fewer relied on a conceptual model that incorporated multidimensionality and subjective determination. The specified duration of the dying and death phase ranged from the last months to hours of life. Of the six published measures reviewed, the Quality of Dying and Death questionnaire (QODD) is the most widely studied and best validated. Strategies to measure the quality of dying and death are becoming increasingly rigorous. Further research is required to understand the factors influencing the ratings of the quality of dying and death.

摘要

为了确定现代医学是否有助于实现“善终”,必须开发和利用衡量临终和死亡质量的适当措施。本文的目的是确定衡量临终和死亡质量的工具,并确定其质量。使用关键词“临终和死亡质量”和“善终/恶终”,检索 MEDLINE(1950-2008 年)、Healthstar(1966-2008 年)和 CINAHL(1982-2008 年)。选择描述临终和死亡质量衡量工具或旨在衡量临终和死亡质量的论文进行综述。评估标准包括衡量工具的开发描述(已验证或特别制定)、提供临终和死亡质量的定义、衡量工具的实证基础、多领域的纳入以及临终和死亡质量构建的主观性、以及对变化的响应性。有 18 项措施符合选择标准。其中 6 项是在发表时对开发过程有一定描述,12 项是特别制定的。不到一半的措施基于临终和死亡质量的明确定义,更少的措施依赖于纳入多维性和主观性判断的概念模型。指定的临终和死亡阶段的持续时间从最后几个月到生命的最后几个小时不等。在审查的 6 项已发表的措施中,死亡质量问卷(QODD)是研究最多、验证最好的。衡量临终和死亡质量的策略正变得越来越严格。需要进一步研究来了解影响临终和死亡质量评分的因素。

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