• 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

家庭护理人员对停止化疗和生命末期过渡的描述。

Family caregiver descriptions of stopping chemotherapy and end-of-life transitions.

机构信息

School of Nursing, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA.

Department of Medicine, Division of Palliative Care, University of Rochester, Rochester, NY, USA.

出版信息

Support Care Cancer. 2019 Feb;27(2):669-675. doi: 10.1007/s00520-018-4365-0. Epub 2018 Jul 28.

DOI:10.1007/s00520-018-4365-0
PMID:30056528
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6338326/
Abstract

PURPOSE

The purpose of this study was to describe family caregivers' perspectives of the final month of life of patients with advanced cancer, particularly whether and how chemotherapy was discontinued and the effect of clinical decision-making on family caregivers' perceptions of the patient's experience of care at the end of life (EOL).

METHODS

Qualitative descriptive design using semi-structured interviews collected from 92 family caregivers of patients with end-stage cancer enrolled in a randomized clinical trial. We used a phased approach to data analysis including open coding, focused coding, and within and across analyses.

RESULTS

We identified three patterns of transitions characterizing the shift away from active cancer treatment: (1) "We Pretty Much Knew," characterized by explicit discussions about EOL care, seemingly shared understanding about prognosis and seamless transitions from disease-oriented treatment to comfort-oriented care, (2) "Beating the Odds," characterized by explicit discussions about disease-directed treatment and EOL care options, but no shared understanding about prognosis and often chaotic transitions to EOL care, and (3) "Left to Die," characterized by no recall of EOL discussions with transitions to EOL occurring in crisis.

CONCLUSIONS

As communication and palliative care interventions continue to develop to improve care for patients with advanced cancer, it is imperative that we take into account the different patterns of transition and their unique patient and caregiver needs near the end of life. Our findings reveal considerable, and potentially unwarranted, variation in transitions from active treatment to death.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在描述晚期癌症患者生命最后一个月的家庭照顾者的观点,特别是探讨化疗是否停止以及临床决策对家庭照顾者对患者临终关怀体验的看法的影响。

方法

采用定性描述设计,对参加随机临床试验的 92 名终末期癌症患者的家庭照顾者进行半结构化访谈。我们采用分阶段的数据分析方法,包括开放式编码、聚焦式编码以及内部和跨分析。

结果

我们确定了三种过渡模式,这些模式描述了从积极癌症治疗转向的情况:(1)“我们基本上已经知道了”,其特征是明确讨论临终关怀,对预后似乎有共同的理解,以及从以疾病为导向的治疗到以舒适为导向的护理的无缝过渡;(2)“战胜病魔”,其特征是明确讨论针对疾病的治疗和临终关怀选择,但对预后没有共同的理解,并且通常是混乱地过渡到临终关怀;(3)“任由死亡”,其特征是没有回忆起与临终关怀相关的讨论,而是在危机中发生临终关怀的过渡。

结论

随着沟通和姑息治疗干预措施的不断发展,以改善晚期癌症患者的护理,我们必须考虑到临终关怀的不同过渡模式及其独特的患者和照顾者需求。我们的研究结果显示,从积极治疗到死亡的过渡存在相当大的、潜在的不必要的差异。

相似文献

1
Family caregiver descriptions of stopping chemotherapy and end-of-life transitions.家庭护理人员对停止化疗和生命末期过渡的描述。
Support Care Cancer. 2019 Feb;27(2):669-675. doi: 10.1007/s00520-018-4365-0. Epub 2018 Jul 28.
2
Factors Predicting Bereaved Caregiver Perception of Quality of Care in the Final Week of Life: Implications for Health Care Providers.预测丧亲照顾者对临终最后一周护理质量认知的因素:对医疗服务提供者的启示
J Palliat Med. 2015 Oct;18(10):849-57. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2015.29001.hp. Epub 2015 Jul 17.
3
End-of-Life Communication Between Providers and Family Caregivers of Home Hospice Patients in a Rural US-Mexico Border Community: Caregivers' Retrospective Perspectives.美国与墨西哥边境农村社区居家临终关怀患者的医护人员与家庭照顾者之间的临终沟通:照顾者的回顾性观点
Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2020 May;37(5):329-335. doi: 10.1177/1049909119885099. Epub 2019 Oct 30.
4
A qualitative analysis of responses to a question prompt list and prognosis and end-of-life care discussion prompts delivered in a communication support program.对在一个沟通支持项目中提供的问题提示列表以及预后和临终关怀讨论提示的回应进行定性分析。
Psychooncology. 2015 Mar;24(3):287-93. doi: 10.1002/pon.3635. Epub 2014 Jul 30.
5
Bereaved Caregivers Perspectives of Negative Communication Experiences Near the End of Life for Adolescents and Young Adults with Cancer.丧亲照料者对青少年和青年癌症患者临终前负面沟通经历的看法。
J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol. 2022 Oct;11(5):498-505. doi: 10.1089/jayao.2021.0154. Epub 2021 Dec 6.
6
End-of-life care decisions using a Korean advance directive among cancer patient-caregiver dyads.癌症患者-照顾者二元组中使用韩国预先指示进行的临终护理决策。
Palliat Support Care. 2017 Feb;15(1):77-87. doi: 10.1017/S1478951516000808. Epub 2016 Nov 2.
7
Minor cognitive impairments in cancer patients magnify the effect of caregiver preferences on end-of-life care.癌症患者的轻度认知障碍放大了照顾者偏好对临终关怀的影响。
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2013 Apr;45(4):650-9. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2012.03.003. Epub 2012 Jul 28.
8
Nurses' perspectives: hospitalized older patients and end-of-life decision-making.护士的观点:住院老年患者与临终决策
Nurs Crit Care. 2016 Mar;21(2):e1-e11. doi: 10.1111/nicc.12125. Epub 2015 Apr 17.
9
Discordance among patient preferences, caregiver preferences, and caregiver predictions of patient preferences regarding disclosure of terminal status and end-of-life choices.在患者偏好、照护者偏好以及照护者对患者关于终末期状况披露和临终选择偏好的预测之间存在不一致。
Psychooncology. 2015 Feb;24(2):212-9. doi: 10.1002/pon.3631. Epub 2014 Aug 7.
10
Issues in end-of-life care: patient, caregiver, and clinician perceptions.临终关怀中的问题:患者、护理人员及临床医生的看法
J Palliat Med. 2003 Feb;6(1):19-31. doi: 10.1089/10966210360510082.

引用本文的文献

1
Shared decision-making in palliative cancer care: A systematic review and metasynthesis.癌症姑息治疗中的共同决策:系统评价和元综合。
Palliat Med. 2024 Apr;38(4):406-422. doi: 10.1177/02692163241238384. Epub 2024 Mar 13.
2
Hospice preference of the family decision-makers for cancer patients in China: an exploratory study.中国癌症患者家庭决策者对临终关怀的偏好:一项探索性研究。
BMC Palliat Care. 2022 Dec 15;21(1):222. doi: 10.1186/s12904-022-01112-1.
3
Interventions for interpersonal communication about end of life care between health practitioners and affected people.干预健康从业者与受影响者之间关于临终关怀的人际沟通。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jul 8;7(7):CD013116. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013116.pub2.
4
A prospective cohort study assessing aggressive interventions at the end-of-life among patients with solid metastatic cancer.一项针对实体转移性癌症患者生命末期积极干预措施的前瞻性队列研究。
BMC Palliat Care. 2022 May 16;21(1):73. doi: 10.1186/s12904-022-00970-z.
5
Understanding and Supporting Informal Cancer Caregivers.理解和支持非正式癌症护理者。
Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2022 Apr;23(4):494-513. doi: 10.1007/s11864-022-00955-3. Epub 2022 Mar 14.
6
Engaging African American family Caregivers in Developing a Culturally-responsive Interview Guide: A Multiphase Process and Approach.让非裔美国家庭照顾者参与制定一份具有文化适应性的访谈指南:一个多阶段的过程与方法。
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2022 Jun;63(6):e705-e711. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2022.02.331. Epub 2022 Mar 3.
7
Chemotherapy during the last 30 days of life and the role of palliative care referral, a single center experience.生命最后 30 天内的化疗和姑息治疗转诊的作用:单中心经验。
BMC Palliat Care. 2022 Feb 7;21(1):20. doi: 10.1186/s12904-022-00910-x.
8
Social networks of older patients with advanced cancer: Potential contributions of an integrated mixed methods network analysis.晚期癌症老年患者的社交网络:综合混合方法网络分析的潜在贡献
J Geriatr Oncol. 2021 Jun;12(5):855-859. doi: 10.1016/j.jgo.2020.12.005. Epub 2020 Dec 17.
9
End-of-life decision making in the context of chronic life-limiting disease: a concept analysis and conceptual model.终末期决策制定在慢性生命有限疾病背景下:概念分析与概念模型。
Nurs Outlook. 2020 Nov-Dec;68(6):784-807. doi: 10.1016/j.outlook.2020.07.008. Epub 2020 Sep 15.
10
Challenges and facilitators of hospice decision-making: a retrospective review of family caregivers of home hospice patients in a rural US-Mexico border region-a qualitative study.临终关怀决策的挑战和促进因素:美国-墨西哥边境农村地区家庭临终关怀患者的回顾性研究-一项定性研究。
BMJ Open. 2020 Jul 1;10(7):e035634. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035634.

本文引用的文献

1
Effect of a Patient-Centered Communication Intervention on Oncologist-Patient Communication, Quality of Life, and Health Care Utilization in Advanced Cancer: The VOICE Randomized Clinical Trial.以患者为中心的沟通干预对晚期癌症患者与肿瘤学家沟通、生活质量及医疗保健利用的影响:VOICE随机临床试验
JAMA Oncol. 2017 Jan 1;3(1):92-100. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2016.4373.
2
Family Perspectives on Aggressive Cancer Care Near the End of Life.家庭对临终前积极癌症治疗的看法。
JAMA. 2016 Jan 19;315(3):284-92. doi: 10.1001/jama.2015.18604.
3
Processes of discontinuing chemotherapy for metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer at the end of life.终末期转移性非小细胞肺癌停止化疗的过程。
J Oncol Pract. 2015 May;11(3):e405-12. doi: 10.1200/JOP.2014.002428. Epub 2015 Mar 31.
4
Values and options in cancer care (VOICE): study design and rationale for a patient-centered communication and decision-making intervention for physicians, patients with advanced cancer, and their caregivers.癌症护理中的价值观和选择(VOICE):一项以患者为中心的沟通和决策干预的研究设计和理论基础,该干预面向医生、晚期癌症患者及其照护者。
BMC Cancer. 2013 Apr 9;13:188. doi: 10.1186/1471-2407-13-188.
5
Patients' expectations about effects of chemotherapy for advanced cancer.晚期癌症化疗效果的患者期望。
N Engl J Med. 2012 Oct 25;367(17):1616-25. doi: 10.1056/NEJMoa1204410.
6
Reasons why physicians do not have discussions about poor prognosis, why it matters, and what can be improved.医生不讨论预后不良情况的原因、其重要性以及可改进之处。
J Clin Oncol. 2012 Aug 1;30(22):2715-7. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2012.42.4564. Epub 2012 Jul 2.
7
Shared mind: communication, decision making, and autonomy in serious illness.共享心智:重病中的沟通、决策和自主性。
Ann Fam Med. 2011 Sep-Oct;9(5):454-61. doi: 10.1370/afm.1301.
8
Family presence in routine medical visits: a meta-analytical review.家庭在常规医疗就诊中的参与:一项荟萃分析综述。
Soc Sci Med. 2011 Mar;72(6):823-31. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2011.01.015. Epub 2011 Feb 24.
9
End-of-life discussions, goal attainment, and distress at the end of life: predictors and outcomes of receipt of care consistent with preferences.生命末期讨论、目标达成和生命末期的痛苦:与偏好一致的护理接受的预测因素和结果。
J Clin Oncol. 2010 Mar 1;28(7):1203-8. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2009.25.4672. Epub 2010 Feb 1.
10
How does communication heal? Pathways linking clinician-patient communication to health outcomes.沟通如何促进康复?连接临床医生与患者沟通和健康结果的途径。
Patient Educ Couns. 2009 Mar;74(3):295-301. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2008.11.015. Epub 2009 Jan 15.