Suppr超能文献

比利时全科医生对临终家庭护理中使用姑息性镇静的看法:一项定性研究。

Belgian general practitioners' perspectives on the use of palliative sedation in end-of-life home care: a qualitative study.

作者信息

Sercu Maria, Pype Peter, Christiaens Thierry, Derese Anselme, Deveugele Myriam

机构信息

Department of Family Medicine and Primary Health Care, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.

Department of Family Medicine and Primary Health Care, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.

出版信息

J Pain Symptom Manage. 2014 Jun;47(6):1054-63. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2013.06.016. Epub 2013 Oct 2.

Abstract

CONTEXT

Palliative sedation (PS) is a far-reaching palliative measure with a life-shortening potential. Guidelines provide only for a restricted use of PS and as a last resort.

OBJECTIVES

To explore PS practice in end-of-life (EoL) home care.

METHODS

This was a qualitative analysis of semi-structured interviews with 52 general practitioners (GPs) of Flanders, Belgium.

RESULTS

Apart from GPs who adhere to the existing prerequisites for PS, opinions diverge among GPs on the indication area for PS and on possible life-shortening intentions. The key to GPs' broadened view on "which suffering merits PS" is the fragile context of EoL home care, and the key to GPs' possible life-shortening intentions is their need to facilitate the dying process, when trying or lengthy. When honoring a terminally ill patient's request for euthanasia, several GPs prefer slow euthanasia using PS to a lethal injection.

CONCLUSION

PS home practice deviates from the PS guidelines' recommendations. In addition to the GPs' shortage of knowledge, the guidelines' recommendations do not always meet the particular needs of EoL home care. If one consideration of EoL home care is to respect a patient's wish to die at home, then the pre-emptive use of PS to avoid a futile transfer to the hospital in the case of an undesirable turn of events deserves more attention in the PS debate.

摘要

背景

姑息性镇静是一种影响深远的姑息治疗措施,具有缩短生命的可能性。指南仅规定在有限的情况下并作为最后手段使用姑息性镇静。

目的

探讨临终家庭护理中的姑息性镇静实践。

方法

对比利时弗拉芒地区52名全科医生进行半结构化访谈,并进行定性分析。

结果

除了坚持姑息性镇静现有前提条件的全科医生外,全科医生对于姑息性镇静的适应症范围以及可能的缩短生命意图存在不同意见。全科医生对“何种痛苦值得进行姑息性镇静”看法更为宽泛的关键在于临终家庭护理的脆弱环境,而全科医生可能存在缩短生命意图的关键在于,在临终过程艰难或漫长时,他们需要推动死亡进程。在尊重绝症患者的安乐死请求时,一些全科医生更倾向于使用姑息性镇静进行缓慢安乐死,而非注射致命药物。

结论

姑息性镇静的家庭实践偏离了指南的建议。除了全科医生知识不足外,指南建议并不总是能满足临终家庭护理的特殊需求。如果临终家庭护理的一个考量是尊重患者在家中离世的愿望,那么在姑息性镇静的讨论中,提前使用姑息性镇静以避免在情况恶化时徒劳地转院至医院,值得更多关注。

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