• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

支持患者考虑临终关怀地点的技能培训:一项随机对照试验。

Skills training to support patients considering place of end-of-life care: a randomized control trial.

作者信息

Murray Mary Ann, Stacey Dawn, Wilson Keith G, O'Connor Annette M

机构信息

School of Nursing, University of Ottawa, 53 Woodhill Crescent, Ottawa, Ontario, Canada K1B 3B7.

出版信息

J Palliat Care. 2010 Summer;26(2):112-21.

PMID:20718396
Abstract

The effect of a program to train clinicians to support patients making decisions about place of end-of-life care was evaluated. In all, 88 oncology and/or palliative care nursing and allied health providers from three Ontario health networks were randomly assigned to an education or control condition. Quality of decision support provided to standardized patients was measured before and after training, as were participants' perceptions about the acceptability of the training program and their intentions to engage in patient decision support. Compared to controls, intervention group members improved the quality of decision support provided and were more likely to address a wider range of decision-making needs. Intervention group members scored higher on a knowledge test of decision support than controls and rated the components as acceptable. Improvements in the quality of decision support can be made by providing training and practical tools such as a patient decision aid.

摘要

对一项培训临床医生以支持患者做出临终护理地点决策的项目效果进行了评估。安大略省三个医疗网络的88名肿瘤学和/或姑息治疗护理及相关健康服务提供者被随机分配到教育组或对照组。在培训前后,测量了为标准化患者提供的决策支持质量,以及参与者对培训项目可接受性的看法和他们参与患者决策支持的意愿。与对照组相比,干预组成员提高了所提供决策支持的质量,并且更有可能满足更广泛的决策需求。干预组成员在决策支持知识测试中的得分高于对照组,并认为这些内容是可接受的。通过提供培训和实用工具(如患者决策辅助工具),可以提高决策支持的质量。

相似文献

1
Skills training to support patients considering place of end-of-life care: a randomized control trial.支持患者考虑临终关怀地点的技能培训:一项随机对照试验。
J Palliat Care. 2010 Summer;26(2):112-21.
2
"Palliative care: the essentials": evaluation of a multidisciplinary education program.《姑息治疗:要点》:一项多学科教育项目的评估
J Palliat Med. 2008 Oct;11(8):1122-9. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2008.0044.
3
Nurses' perceptions of factors influencing patient decision support for place of care at the end of life.护士对影响临终关怀地点患者决策支持因素的看法。
Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2009 Aug-Sep;26(4):254-63. doi: 10.1177/1049909108331316. Epub 2009 Feb 12.
4
Oncology nurses' personal understandings about palliative care.肿瘤护理人员对姑息治疗的个人理解。
Oncol Nurs Forum. 2010 May;37(3):E141-50. doi: 10.1188/10.ONF.E141-E150.
5
Efficacy of a training intervention on the quality of practitioners' decision support for patients deciding about place of care at the end of life: A randomized control trial: Study protocol.一项关于培训干预对从业者为临终患者提供护理地点决策支持质量的效果:一项随机对照试验:研究方案
BMC Palliat Care. 2008 Apr 30;7:4. doi: 10.1186/1472-684X-7-4.
6
Overcoming barriers to cancer-helpline professionals providing decision support for callers: an implementation study.克服癌症求助热线专业人员为来电者提供决策支持的障碍:一项实施研究。
Oncol Nurs Forum. 2008 Nov;35(6):961-9. doi: 10.1188/08.ONF.961-969.
7
Modernising cancer and palliative care education in the UK: insights from one Cancer Network.英国癌症与姑息治疗教育的现代化:来自一个癌症网络的见解
Eur J Oncol Nurs. 2006 Jul;10(3):187-97. doi: 10.1016/j.ejon.2005.07.004. Epub 2006 Jul 7.
8
Training intervention for health care staff in the provision of existential support to patients with cancer: a randomized, controlled study.为癌症患者提供存在支持的医疗保健人员培训干预:一项随机对照研究。
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2013 Dec;46(6):785-94. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2013.01.013. Epub 2013 Jun 10.
9
Discussing the transition to palliative care: evaluation of a brief communication skills training program for oncology clinicians.探讨向姑息治疗的过渡:对肿瘤临床医生进行简短沟通技巧培训计划的评估。
Palliat Support Care. 2010 Dec;8(4):441-7. doi: 10.1017/S1478951510000313. Epub 2010 Sep 28.
10
Care management by oncology nurses to address palliative care needs: a pilot trial to assess feasibility, acceptability, and perceived effectiveness of the CONNECT intervention.肿瘤护理人员进行的护理管理以满足姑息治疗需求:一项评估CONNECT干预措施的可行性、可接受性和感知有效性的试点试验。
J Palliat Med. 2015 Mar;18(3):232-40. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2014.0325. Epub 2014 Dec 17.

引用本文的文献

1
[Not Available].[无可用内容]。
Can Oncol Nurs J. 2024 Apr 1;34(2):158-165. doi: 10.5737/23688076342158. eCollection 2024 Spring.
2
Decision support for breast cancer screening decisions: A single case pre-/post-test study.乳腺癌筛查决策的决策支持:一项单病例测试前/后研究。
Can Oncol Nurs J. 2024 Apr 1;34(2):151-157. doi: 10.5737/23688076342151. eCollection 2024 Spring.
3
Effectiveness of Shared Decision-making Training Programs for Health Care Professionals Using Reflexivity Strategies: Secondary Analysis of a Systematic Review.
使用反思策略的医疗保健专业人员共同决策培训项目的有效性:一项系统评价的二次分析
JMIR Med Educ. 2022 Dec 7;8(4):e42033. doi: 10.2196/42033.
4
Interventions for interpersonal communication about end of life care between health practitioners and affected people.干预健康从业者与受影响者之间关于临终关怀的人际沟通。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jul 8;7(7):CD013116. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013116.pub2.
5
Ottawa Decision Support Framework to Improve Iranian Nurses' Decision Coaching Skills.渥太华决策支持框架以提高伊朗护士的决策指导技能
Indian J Crit Care Med. 2022 Feb;26(2):199-203. doi: 10.5005/jp-journals-10071-24106.
6
Are shared decision making studies well enough described to be replicated? Secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review.共享决策研究的描述是否充分到足以被复制?一项考科蓝系统评价的二次分析。
PLoS One. 2022 Mar 16;17(3):e0265401. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0265401. eCollection 2022.
7
Sex and gender considerations in implementation interventions to promote shared decision making: A secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review.在实施干预措施以促进共同决策时考虑性别因素:对 Cochrane 系统评价的二次分析。
PLoS One. 2020 Oct 8;15(10):e0240371. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0240371. eCollection 2020.
8
Teaching clinicians shared decision making and risk communication online: an evaluation study.在线教授临床医生共同决策和风险沟通:一项评估研究。
BMJ Evid Based Med. 2021 Oct;26(5):253. doi: 10.1136/bmjebm-2020-111521. Epub 2020 Sep 22.
9
Strategies to evaluate healthcare provider trainings in shared decision-making (SDM): a systematic review of evaluation studies.评估医疗服务提供者在共享决策(SDM)方面培训的策略:评估研究的系统评价。
BMJ Open. 2019 Jun 21;9(6):e026488. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2018-026488.
10
A systematic review of the effects of advance care planning facilitators training programs.对预先护理计划促进者培训项目效果的系统评价。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2019 Jun 7;19(1):362. doi: 10.1186/s12913-019-4192-0.