Brännström Margareta, Fürst Carl Johan, Tishelman Carol, Petzold Max, Lindqvist Olav
Department of Nursing, Umeå University Campus Skellefteå, Umeå, Sweden
The Institute for Palliative Care, Lund University and Region Skåne, Lund, Sweden.
Palliat Med. 2016 Jan;30(1):54-63. doi: 10.1177/0269216315588007. Epub 2015 May 18.
Clinical pathways aim to ensure that individuals receive appropriate evidence-based care and interventions, with the Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient focusing on end of life. However, controlled studies of the Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient, particularly outside of cancer settings, are lacking.
To compare the effects of the Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient and usual care on patients' symptom distress and well-being during the last days of life, in residential care homes.
Exploratory, controlled before-and-after study. During a 15-month baseline, usual care was carried out in two areas. During the following 15-months, usual care continued in the control area, while residential care home staff implemented Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient use in the intervention area. The intervention was evaluated by family members completing retrospective symptom assessments after the patient's death, using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System and Views of Informal Carers - Evaluation of Services.
SETTINGS/PARTICIPANTS: Patients who died at all 19 residential care homes in one municipality in Sweden.
Shortness of breath (estimate = -2.46; 95% confidence interval = -4.43 to -0.49) and nausea (estimate = -1.83; 95% confidence interval = -3.12 to -0.54) were significantly reduced in Edmonton Symptom Assessment System in patients in the intervention compared to the control area. A statistically significant improvement in shortness of breath was also found on the Views of Informal Carers - Evaluation of Services item (estimate = -0.47; 95% confidence interval = -0.85 to -0.08).
When implemented with adequate staff training and support, the Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient may be a useful tool for providing end-of-life care of elderly people at the end of life in non-cancer settings.
临床路径旨在确保个体接受适当的循证护理和干预措施,其中《利物浦临终患者护理路径》专注于临终阶段。然而,针对《利物浦临终患者护理路径》的对照研究较为缺乏,尤其是在癌症环境之外。
比较《利物浦临终患者护理路径》与常规护理对养老院中患者临终前症状困扰和生活质量的影响。
探索性前后对照研究。在为期15个月的基线期,两个区域均提供常规护理。在接下来的15个月中,对照区域继续提供常规护理,而干预区域的养老院工作人员实施《利物浦临终患者护理路径》。通过家庭成员在患者去世后使用埃德蒙顿症状评估系统和非正式护理人员服务评价对症状进行回顾性评估来评价干预措施。
地点/参与者:瑞典一个市所有19家养老院中去世的患者。
与对照区域相比,干预区域患者在埃德蒙顿症状评估系统中的呼吸急促(估计值=-2.46;95%置信区间=-4.43至-0.49)和恶心(估计值=-1.83;95%置信区间=-3.12至-0.54)显著减轻。在非正式护理人员服务评价项目中,呼吸急促也有统计学上的显著改善(估计值=-0.47;95%置信区间=-0.85至-0.08)。
在给予充分的员工培训和支持的情况下实施时,《利物浦临终患者护理路径》可能是在非癌症环境中为老年人提供临终护理的有用工具。