Suppr超能文献

患者和照护者报告的姑息治疗评估工具:2017 年美国医疗保健研究与质量局技术简报摘要。

Patient- and Caregiver-Reported Assessment Tools for Palliative Care: Summary of the 2017 Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality Technical Brief.

机构信息

Department of Anesthesiology and Critical Care Medicine, The Johns Hopkins School of Medicine, Baltimore, Maryland, USA; Department of Oncology, Palliative Care Program, Kimmel Comprehensive Cancer Center at Johns Hopkins, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

Department of Health Policy and Management, Johns Hopkins School of Public Health, Baltimore, Maryland, USA.

出版信息

J Pain Symptom Manage. 2017 Dec;54(6):961-972.e16. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2017.04.022. Epub 2017 Aug 15.

Abstract

CONTEXT

Assessment tools are data collection instruments that are completed by or with patients or caregivers and which collect data at the individual patient or caregiver level.

OBJECTIVES

The objectives of this study are to 1) summarize palliative care assessment tools completed by or with patients or caregivers and 2) identify needs for future tool development and evaluation.

METHODS

We completed 1) a systematic review of systematic reviews; 2) a supplemental search of previous reviews and Web sites, and/or 3) a targeted search for primary articles when no tools existed in a domain. Paired investigators screened search results, assessed risk of bias, and abstracted data. We organized tools by domains from the National Consensus Project Clinical Practice Guidelines for Palliative Care and selected the most relevant, recent, and highest quality systematic review for each domain.

RESULTS

We included 10 systematic reviews and identified 152 tools (97 from systematic reviews and 55 from supplemental sources). Key gaps included no systematic review for pain and few tools assessing structural, cultural, spiritual, or ethical/legal domains, or patient-reported experience with end-of-life care. Psychometric information was available for many tools, but few studies evaluated responsiveness (sensitivity to change) and no studies compared tools.

CONCLUSION

Few to no tools address the spiritual, ethical, or cultural domains or patient-reported experience with end-of-life care. While some data exist on psychometric properties of tools, the responsiveness of different tools to change and/or comparisons between tools have not been evaluated. Future research should focus on developing or testing tools that address domains for which few tools exist, evaluating responsiveness, and comparing tools.

摘要

背景

评估工具是由患者或护理人员完成或与之共同完成的收集数据的工具,用于收集个体患者或护理人员层面的数据。

目的

本研究的目的是 1)总结由患者或护理人员完成或与之共同完成的姑息治疗评估工具,以及 2)确定未来工具开发和评估的需求。

方法

我们完成了 1)对系统评价的系统综述;2)对以前的综述和网站的补充搜索,以及/或者 3)当某个领域不存在工具时,针对主要文章进行有针对性的搜索。配对的研究人员筛选搜索结果,评估偏倚风险,并提取数据。我们根据国家姑息治疗共识项目临床实践指南的领域组织工具,并为每个领域选择最相关、最新和质量最高的系统评价。

结果

我们纳入了 10 篇系统评价,共识别出 152 种工具(97 种来自系统评价,55 种来自补充来源)。主要差距包括缺乏疼痛的系统评价以及很少有工具评估结构、文化、精神或伦理/法律领域,或患者对临终关怀的体验。许多工具都有心理计量学信息,但很少有研究评估反应性(对变化的敏感性),也没有研究比较工具。

结论

几乎没有工具可以解决精神、伦理或文化领域或患者对临终关怀的体验。虽然一些工具的心理计量学特性存在数据,但不同工具的反应性变化和/或工具之间的比较尚未得到评估。未来的研究应侧重于开发或测试针对工具较少的领域的工具,评估反应性,并比较工具。

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