• 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

相似文献

1
Why is the Liverpool care pathway used for some dying cancer patients and not others? Healthcare professionals' perspectives.为什么利物浦护理路径适用于一些临终癌症患者而不适用于其他患者?医疗保健专业人员的观点。
BMC Res Notes. 2012 Sep 24;5:524. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-5-524.
2
The AMBER care bundle for hospital inpatients with uncertain recovery nearing the end of life: the ImproveCare feasibility cluster RCT.AMBER 关怀包用于生命末期临近、康复情况不确定的住院患者:改善关怀可行性群组 RCT。
Health Technol Assess. 2019 Oct;23(55):1-150. doi: 10.3310/hta23550.
3
'Less ticking the boxes, more providing support': A qualitative study on health professionals' concerns towards the Liverpool Care of the Dying Pathway.“少打勾,多提供支持”:关于医疗专业人员对利物浦临终关怀路径担忧的定性研究
Palliat Med. 2015 Jun;29(6):529-37. doi: 10.1177/0269216315570408. Epub 2015 Feb 17.
4
Life after the Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP): a qualitative study of critical care practitioners delivering end-of-life care.利物浦临终关怀路径(LCP)后的生活:对提供临终关怀的重症监护从业者的定性研究。
J Adv Nurs. 2015 Sep;71(9):2108-18. doi: 10.1111/jan.12680. Epub 2015 May 14.
5
Healthcare professionals' perspectives on delivering end-of-life care within acute hospital trusts: a qualitative study.医疗保健专业人员对在急性医院信托机构中提供临终关怀的看法:一项定性研究。
BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2015 Dec;5(5):490-5. doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2013-000468. Epub 2013 Nov 19.
6
Care professional's experiences about using Liverpool Care Pathway in end-of-life care in residential care homes.护理专业人员在养老院临终关怀中使用利物浦临终关怀路径的经验。
Scand J Caring Sci. 2018 Mar;32(1):299-308. doi: 10.1111/scs.12462. Epub 2017 Jun 29.
7
Use of the proportion of patients dying on an End of Life Pathway as a quality marker: considerations for interpretation.将终末期疾病路径上死亡的患者比例用作质量指标的使用:解释方面的考虑。
Palliat Med. 2010 Jul;24(5):544-7. doi: 10.1177/0269216310368579. Epub 2010 May 25.
8
Experiences with the Liverpool care pathway for the dying patient in nursing home residents: a mixed-method study to assess physicians' and nurse practitioners' perceptions.养老院临终患者利物浦护理路径的体验:一项评估医生和护士从业者看法的混合方法研究。
BMC Palliat Care. 2020 Nov 30;19(1):183. doi: 10.1186/s12904-020-00686-y.
9
Hospital doctors' understanding of use and withdrawal of the Liverpool Care Pathway: A qualitative study of practice-based experiences during times of change.医院医生对利物浦护理路径的使用和停用的理解:变革时期基于实践经验的定性研究。
Palliat Med. 2017 Oct;31(9):833-841. doi: 10.1177/0269216316679927. Epub 2016 Dec 8.
10
Effectiveness of the Liverpool care pathway for the dying in residential care homes: An exploratory, controlled before-and-after study.利物浦临终关怀路径在养老院中的有效性:一项探索性的前后对照研究。
Palliat Med. 2016 Jan;30(1):54-63. doi: 10.1177/0269216315588007. Epub 2015 May 18.

引用本文的文献

1
Prognostic decision-making about imminent death within multidisciplinary teams: a scoping review.多学科团队中关于即将死亡的预后决策:范围综述。
BMJ Open. 2022 Apr 5;12(4):e057194. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057194.
2
The characteristics of patients who discontinue their dying process - an observational study at a single university hospital centre.终止濒死过程的患者特征——在一家大学医院中心进行的观察性研究
BMC Palliat Care. 2015 Dec 7;14:72. doi: 10.1186/s12904-015-0070-7.
3
Evaluating the Liverpool Care Pathway for care of the terminally ill in rural Australia.评估澳大利亚农村地区临终关怀的利物浦护理路径。
Support Care Cancer. 2015 Nov;23(11):3173-81. doi: 10.1007/s00520-015-2697-6. Epub 2015 Mar 24.

本文引用的文献

1
The Liverpool Care Pathway provides clarity and focus; communication, care, and compassion come from you.利物浦护理路径提供了清晰性和重点;沟通、关怀和同情则来自于你。
Int J Palliat Nurs. 2011 Nov;17(11):529. doi: 10.12968/ijpn.2011.17.11.529.
2
Issues and needs in end-of-life decision making: an international modified Delphi study.终末期决策制定中的问题和需求:一项国际改良德尔菲研究。
Palliat Med. 2012 Oct;26(7):947-53. doi: 10.1177/0269216311423794. Epub 2011 Oct 3.
3
Nurses' views on using the Liverpool care pathway in an acute hospital setting.护士对在急症医院环境中使用利物浦护理路径的看法。
Int J Palliat Nurs. 2011 May;17(5):239-44. doi: 10.12968/ijpn.2011.17.5.239.
4
Expectations about and impact of the Liverpool Care Pathway for the dying patient in an Italian hospital.对意大利医院临终患者利物浦护理路径的期望和影响。
Palliat Med. 2011 Jun;25(4):293-303. doi: 10.1177/0269216310392436. Epub 2011 Jan 14.
5
The Liverpool Care Pathway in intensive care: an exploratory study of doctor and nurse perceptions.重症监护中的利物浦护理路径:医生和护士认知的探索性研究。
Int J Palliat Nurs. 2010 Jun;16(6):267-73. doi: 10.12968/ijpn.2010.16.6.48825.
6
Use of the proportion of patients dying on an End of Life Pathway as a quality marker: considerations for interpretation.将终末期疾病路径上死亡的患者比例用作质量指标的使用:解释方面的考虑。
Palliat Med. 2010 Jul;24(5):544-7. doi: 10.1177/0269216310368579. Epub 2010 May 25.
7
The implementation of an end-of-life integrated care pathway in a Chinese population.在中国人群中实施临终综合照护路径。
Int J Palliat Nurs. 2009 Aug;15(8):384-8. doi: 10.12968/ijpn.2009.15.8.43797.
8
Liverpool care pathway carers survey.利物浦关怀路径护理者调查。
Palliat Med. 2009 Sep;23(6):571-2. doi: 10.1177/0269216309106459. Epub 2009 May 21.
9
Using the LCP: bereaved relatives' assessments of communication and bereavement.使用利物浦关怀路径:丧亲亲属对沟通及丧亲之痛的评估
Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2008 Jun-Jul;25(3):207-14. doi: 10.1177/1049909108315515. Epub 2008 Apr 10.
10
The effect of the Liverpool Care Pathway for the dying: a multi-centre study.利物浦临终关怀路径的效果:一项多中心研究。
Palliat Med. 2008 Mar;22(2):145-51. doi: 10.1177/0269216307087164.

为什么利物浦护理路径适用于一些临终癌症患者而不适用于其他患者?医疗保健专业人员的观点。

Why is the Liverpool care pathway used for some dying cancer patients and not others? Healthcare professionals' perspectives.

作者信息

Freemantle Alison, Seymour Jane

机构信息

Hayward House, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, Hucknall Road, Nottingham NG5 1 PB, UK.

出版信息

BMC Res Notes. 2012 Sep 24;5:524. doi: 10.1186/1756-0500-5-524.

DOI:10.1186/1756-0500-5-524
PMID:23006138
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3532332/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Despite evidence suggesting that the Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient is a structured and proficient means of supporting care delivery in the last hours or days of life, discrepancies in uptake are widespread. This exploratory study sought to understand why patients dying of cancer in oncology wards of one hospital trust were, or were not, supported by the LCP. A purposive qualitative case study design was used; each case represented a patient who had died and their most involved nurse and doctor. In-depth interviews explored both recollections of the 'case' and wider experiences of using the Pathway in end-of-life care. Eleven healthcare professionals were interviewed about their involvement in the end-of-life care of six patients. For four of these patients care was supported by the LCP.

FINDINGS

Although doctors and nurses reported they preferred to use the Pathway to ensure comfortable death, an important factor influencing their decisions was time of death. Access to timely senior review was regarded as an essential preliminary to placing patients on the Pathway but delayed access 'out of hours' was commonly experienced and tensions arose from balancing conflicting priorities. Consequently, the needs of dying patients sometimes failed to compete with those receiving curative treatment.

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that greater attention should be focused on 'out of hours' care in hospitals to ensure regular senior review of all patients at risk of dying and to support front line staff to communicate effectively and make contingency plans focused on patients' best interests.

摘要

背景

尽管有证据表明,《利物浦临终关怀路径》是在生命的最后数小时或数天里支持护理工作的一种结构化且有效的方法,但在采用率方面仍存在广泛差异。这项探索性研究旨在了解一家医院信托机构肿瘤病房中死于癌症的患者为何得到或未得到该临终关怀路径的支持。采用了目的抽样的定性案例研究设计;每个案例代表一名已去世的患者及其最主要的护士和医生。深度访谈探讨了对“案例”的回忆以及在临终护理中使用该路径的更广泛经历。就11名医疗保健专业人员参与6名患者的临终护理情况进行了访谈。其中4名患者的护理得到了临终关怀路径的支持。

研究结果

尽管医生和护士表示他们更愿意使用该路径以确保患者安详离世,但影响他们决策的一个重要因素是死亡时间。获得及时的上级评估被视为将患者纳入该路径的必要前提,但经常出现“非工作时间”延迟获得评估的情况,并且在平衡相互冲突的优先事项时产生了紧张关系。因此,临终患者的需求有时无法与接受治愈性治疗的患者的需求相竞争。

结论

本研究表明,应更加关注医院的“非工作时间”护理,以确保对所有有死亡风险的患者进行定期上级评估,并支持一线工作人员进行有效沟通并制定以患者最佳利益为重点的应急计划。