• 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

常见的遗愿清单项目。

Common Items on a Bucket List.

机构信息

1 Division of Primary Care and Population Health, Center of Population Health Sciences, Stanford University School of Medicine , Stanford, California.

2 VA Palo Alto Health Care System , Palo Alto, California.

出版信息

J Palliat Med. 2018 May;21(5):652-658. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2017.0512. Epub 2018 Feb 8.

DOI:10.1089/jpm.2017.0512
PMID:29415602
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC5946728/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

To provide preference-sensitive care, we propose that clinicians might routinely inquire about their patients' bucket-lists and discuss the impact (if any) of their medical treatments on their life goals.

METHODS

This cross-sectional, mixed methods online study explores the concept of the bucket list and seeks to identify common bucket list themes. Data were collected in 2015-2016 through an online survey, which was completed by a total of 3056 participants across the United States. Forty participants who had a bucket list were identified randomly and used as the development cohort: their responses were analyzed qualitatively using grounded theory methods to identify the six key bucket list themes. The responses of the remaining 3016 participants were used for the validation study. The codes identified from the development cohort were validated by analyses of responses from 50 randomly drawn subjects from the validation cohort. All the 3016 validation cohort transcripts were coded for presence or absence of each of the six bucket list themes.

RESULTS

Around 91.2% participants had a bucket list. Age and spirituality influence the patient's bucket-list. Participants who reported that faith/religion/spirituality was important to them were most likely (95%) to have a bucket list compared with those who reported it to be unimportant (68.2%), χ = 37.67. Six primary themes identified were the desire to travel (78.5%), desire to accomplish a personal goal (78.3%), desire to achieve specific life milestones (51%), desire to spend quality time with friends and family (16.7%), desire to achieve financial stability (24.3%), and desire to do a daring activity (15%).

CONCLUSIONS

The bucket list is a simple framework that can be used to engage patients about their healthcare decision making. Knowing a patient's bucket list can aid clinicians in relating each treatment option to its potential impact (if any) on the patient's life and life goals to promote informed decision making.

摘要

背景

为了提供偏好敏感的护理,我们建议临床医生可以常规询问患者的遗愿清单,并讨论其医疗治疗对其生活目标的影响(如果有的话)。

方法

本横断面混合方法在线研究探讨了遗愿清单的概念,并试图确定常见的遗愿清单主题。数据于 2015-2016 年通过在线调查收集,共有来自美国各地的 3056 名参与者完成了调查。随机确定了 40 名有遗愿清单的参与者作为开发队列:使用扎根理论方法对他们的回答进行定性分析,以确定六个关键的遗愿清单主题。剩余的 3016 名参与者的回答用于验证研究。从开发队列中确定的代码通过对验证队列中 50 名随机抽取的受试者的回答进行分析进行验证。验证队列中的所有 3016 个转录本都对六个遗愿清单主题中的每一个进行了存在或不存在的编码。

结果

约 91.2%的参与者有遗愿清单。年龄和灵性影响患者的遗愿清单。与报告信仰/宗教/灵性对他们不重要的参与者(68.2%)相比,报告信仰/宗教/灵性对他们重要的参与者(95%)更有可能拥有遗愿清单,χ=37.67。确定了六个主要主题:旅行愿望(78.5%)、完成个人目标的愿望(78.3%)、实现特定生活里程碑的愿望(51%)、与朋友和家人共度美好时光的愿望(16.7%)、实现财务稳定的愿望(24.3%)和进行冒险活动的愿望(15%)。

结论

遗愿清单是一个简单的框架,可以用来让患者参与他们的医疗保健决策。了解患者的遗愿清单可以帮助临床医生将每种治疗选择与其对患者生活和生活目标的潜在影响(如果有的话)联系起来,以促进知情决策。

相似文献

1
Common Items on a Bucket List.常见的遗愿清单项目。
J Palliat Med. 2018 May;21(5):652-658. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2017.0512. Epub 2018 Feb 8.
2
Health Care Professionals' Responses to Religious or Spiritual Statements by Surrogate Decision Makers During Goals-of-Care Discussions.医疗保健专业人员对代理人决策者在目标关怀讨论中提出的宗教或精神问题的回应。
JAMA Intern Med. 2015 Oct;175(10):1662-9. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2015.4124.
3
The patient experience of patient-centered communication with nurses in the hospital setting: a qualitative systematic review protocol.医院环境中患者与护士以患者为中心的沟通体验:一项定性系统评价方案
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):76-87. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1072.
4
High satisfaction and low decisional conflict with advance care planning among chronically ill patients with advanced chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or heart failure using an online decision aid: A pilot study.使用在线决策辅助工具对晚期慢性阻塞性肺疾病或心力衰竭慢性病患者进行预先护理计划的高满意度和低决策冲突:一项试点研究。
Chronic Illn. 2016 Sep;12(3):227-35. doi: 10.1177/1742395316633511. Epub 2016 Apr 6.
5
How do general end-of-life treatment goals and values relate to specific treatment preferences? a population-based study.一般的临终治疗目标和价值观与特定的治疗偏好有何关系?一项基于人群的研究。
Palliat Med. 2014 Dec;28(10):1206-12. doi: 10.1177/0269216314540017. Epub 2014 Jun 18.
6
Patient-Reported Barriers to High-Quality, End-of-Life Care: A Multiethnic, Multilingual, Mixed-Methods Study.患者报告的高质量临终关怀障碍:一项多民族、多语言的混合方法研究。
J Palliat Med. 2016 Apr;19(4):373-9. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2015.0403. Epub 2015 Nov 17.
7
No Easy Talk: A Mixed Methods Study of Doctor Reported Barriers to Conducting Effective End-of-Life Conversations with Diverse Patients.艰难的谈话:一项关于医生报告的与不同患者进行有效临终谈话障碍的混合方法研究。
PLoS One. 2015 Apr 22;10(4):e0122321. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0122321. eCollection 2015.
8
The advance care planning PREPARE study among older Veterans with serious and chronic illness: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.针对患有严重慢性病的老年退伍军人的预先护理计划PREPARE研究:一项随机对照试验的研究方案。
Trials. 2015 Dec 12;16:570. doi: 10.1186/s13063-015-1055-9.
9
End-of-Life Travel: A Bucket List Desire for Patients With Life-Limiting Illnesses.临终旅行:绝症患者的遗愿清单愿望
J Hosp Palliat Nurs. 2019 Oct;21(5):397-403. doi: 10.1097/NJH.0000000000000542.
10
Advance care planning: a qualitative study of dialysis patients and families.预立医疗照护计划:对透析患者及其家属的定性研究
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2015 Mar 6;10(3):390-400. doi: 10.2215/CJN.07490714. Epub 2015 Feb 13.

引用本文的文献

1
Functional goals and outcomes of rehabilitation within palliative care: a multicentre prospective cohort study.姑息治疗中康复的功能目标与结果:一项多中心前瞻性队列研究
BMC Palliat Care. 2025 Jul 1;24(1):172. doi: 10.1186/s12904-025-01816-0.
2
Sustaining Joy in Serious Neurologic Illnesses.在严重神经系统疾病中保持快乐。
Semin Neurol. 2024 Oct;44(5):551-558. doi: 10.1055/s-0044-1788725. Epub 2024 Aug 2.
3
Can virtual reality travel help nursing home patients fulfill their bucket list?虚拟现实旅行能帮助养老院患者完成他们的人生愿望清单吗?
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2023 Sep;71(9):2976-2978. doi: 10.1111/jgs.18392. Epub 2023 May 12.
4
Challenges in self-management of persons living with advanced cancer: An exploratory, in-depth interview study.晚期癌症患者自我管理面临的挑战:一项探索性、深入的访谈研究。
Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2022 Nov;31(6):e13638. doi: 10.1111/ecc.13638. Epub 2022 Jun 21.
5
What are the personal last wishes of people with a life-limiting illness? Findings from a longitudinal observational study in specialist palliative care.患有绝症的人的个人遗愿是什么?一项在专科姑息治疗中进行的纵向观察研究的结果。
BMC Palliat Care. 2022 Mar 22;21(1):38. doi: 10.1186/s12904-022-00928-1.
6
Would people living with epilepsy benefit from palliative care?癫痫患者是否会从姑息治疗中受益?
Epilepsy Behav. 2021 Jan;114(Pt A):107618. doi: 10.1016/j.yebeh.2020.107618. Epub 2020 Nov 24.
7
Community Views on 'What I Want 'Before I Die'.社区对“我死前想要的东西”的看法。
Behav Sci (Basel). 2018 Nov 30;8(12):111. doi: 10.3390/bs8120111.

本文引用的文献

1
REMAP: A Framework for Goals of Care Conversations.REMAP:照护目标对话框架
J Oncol Pract. 2017 Oct;13(10):e844-e850. doi: 10.1200/JOP.2016.018796. Epub 2017 Apr 26.
2
Integrating Palliative Care to Promote Earlier Conversations and to Increase the Skill and Comfort of Nonpalliative Care Clinicians: Lessons Learned From an Interventional Field Trial.整合姑息治疗以促进更早的沟通,并提高非姑息治疗临床医生的技能和舒适度:一项干预性现场试验的经验教训。
Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2018 Jan;35(1):132-137. doi: 10.1177/1049909117696027. Epub 2017 Apr 7.
3
Goals of care conversation teaching in residency - a cross-sectional survey of postgraduate program directors.住院医师培训中医疗照护目标沟通教学——对研究生项目主任的横断面调查
BMC Med Educ. 2017 Jan 6;17(1):6. doi: 10.1186/s12909-016-0839-2.
4
Precision Health Outcomes Require Precise Patient Identification.精准的健康结果需要精准的患者识别。
JAMA Surg. 2016 Nov 1;151(11):1030-1031. doi: 10.1001/jamasurg.2016.2078.
5
Precision Health Economics and Outcomes Research to Support Precision Medicine: Big Data Meets Patient Heterogeneity on the Road to Value.支持精准医疗的精准健康经济学与结果研究:在通往价值的道路上,大数据与患者异质性相遇。
J Pers Med. 2016 Nov 2;6(4):20. doi: 10.3390/jpm6040020.
6
Implementing goals of care conversations with veterans in VA long-term care setting: a mixed methods protocol.在 VA 长期护理环境中与退伍军人实施护理目标对话:一项混合方法研究方案。
Implement Sci. 2016 Sep 29;11(1):132. doi: 10.1186/s13012-016-0497-0.
7
An Intervention to Enhance Goals-of-Care Communication Between Heart Failure Patients and Heart Failure Providers.一项旨在加强心力衰竭患者与心力衰竭医护人员之间关于治疗目标沟通的干预措施。
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2016 Sep;52(3):353-60. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2016.03.018. Epub 2016 Jul 9.
8
Toward precision medicine and health: Opportunities and challenges in allergic diseases.迈向精准医学与健康:过敏性疾病中的机遇与挑战。
J Allergy Clin Immunol. 2016 May;137(5):1289-300. doi: 10.1016/j.jaci.2016.03.006.
9
An exploration of contextual dimensions impacting goals of care conversations in postgraduate medical education.对影响研究生医学教育中护理目标对话的背景维度的探索。
BMC Palliat Care. 2016 Mar 21;15:34. doi: 10.1186/s12904-016-0107-6.
10
Patient-Reported Barriers to High-Quality, End-of-Life Care: A Multiethnic, Multilingual, Mixed-Methods Study.患者报告的高质量临终关怀障碍:一项多民族、多语言的混合方法研究。
J Palliat Med. 2016 Apr;19(4):373-9. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2015.0403. Epub 2015 Nov 17.