• 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

相似文献

1
Primary palliative care team perspectives on coordinating and managing people with advanced cancer in the community: a qualitative study.初级姑息治疗团队对社区中晚期癌症患者的协调与管理的看法:一项定性研究
BMC Fam Pract. 2018 Nov 20;19(1):177. doi: 10.1186/s12875-018-0861-z.
2
Facilitating good process in primary palliative care: does the Gold Standards Framework enable quality performance?促进初级姑息治疗中的良好流程:黄金标准框架能否实现高质量绩效?
Fam Pract. 2007 Oct;24(5):486-94. doi: 10.1093/fampra/cmm045. Epub 2007 Aug 4.
3
Palliative care experiences of adult cancer patients from ethnocultural groups: a qualitative systematic review protocol.不同种族文化群体成年癌症患者的姑息治疗体验:一项定性系统评价方案
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):99-111. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1809.
4
Using Palliative Care Needs Rounds in the UK for care home staff and residents: an implementation science study.在英国,使用姑息治疗需求评估小组为养老院工作人员和居民提供服务:一项实施科学研究。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2024 Jul;12(19):1-134. doi: 10.3310/KRWQ5829.
5
Patient, carer and professional perspectives on barriers and facilitators to quality care in advanced heart failure.患者、护理人员及专业人士对晚期心力衰竭优质护理的障碍与促进因素的看法。
PLoS One. 2014 Mar 27;9(3):e93288. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0093288. eCollection 2014.
6
Common care practices among effective community-based specialist palliative care teams: a qualitative study.有效的基于社区的专科姑息治疗团队的常见护理实践:一项定性研究。
BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2020 Mar;10(1):e3. doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2016-001221. Epub 2017 Apr 19.
7
Conceptualising effective symptom management in palliative care: a novel model derived from qualitative data.概念化姑息治疗中的有效症状管理:一种源自定性数据的新模型。
BMC Palliat Care. 2022 Feb 4;21(1):17. doi: 10.1186/s12904-022-00904-9.
8
What are essential elements of high-quality palliative care at home? An interview study among patients and relatives faced with advanced cancer.居家高质量姑息治疗的基本要素有哪些?一项针对晚期癌症患者和家属的访谈研究。
BMC Palliat Care. 2019 Nov 6;18(1):96. doi: 10.1186/s12904-019-0485-7.
9
Understanding the distinct experience of rural interprofessional collaboration in developing palliative care programs.了解农村跨专业合作在制定姑息治疗计划方面的独特经验。
Rural Remote Health. 2014;14(2):2711. Epub 2014 May 14.
10
Community out-of-hours palliative care - 'It's a patchwork of services': A qualitative study exploring care provision.社区非工作时间的姑息治疗——“服务拼凑而成”:一项探索护理服务提供情况的定性研究
Palliat Med. 2025 Feb;39(2):245-255. doi: 10.1177/02692163241302671. Epub 2024 Dec 11.

引用本文的文献

1
"We need time, a great know-how and security for patients to always be there in time": a qualitative study on factors distinguishing General from Specialized Palliative Home Care.“我们需要时间、精湛的专业技能以及保障患者能及时获得护理的安全措施”:一项关于区分普通姑息家庭护理与专科姑息家庭护理的因素的定性研究
BMC Health Serv Res. 2025 Feb 13;25(1):245. doi: 10.1186/s12913-025-12258-y.
2
Experience of multidisciplinary medical teams on humanistic palliative care in oncology wards: a descriptive qualitative study in Southern China.多学科医疗团队在肿瘤科人文关怀中的经验:中国南方的一项描述性定性研究。
BMJ Open. 2024 Feb 26;14(2):e074628. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-074628.
3
The Organization of Home Palliative Cancer Care by Primary Health Care: A Systematic Review Protocol.基层医疗组织居家舒缓疗护癌症照护:系统评价方案。
Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2023 Mar 14;20(6):5085. doi: 10.3390/ijerph20065085.
4
Healthcare practices that increase the quality of care in cancer trajectories from a general practice perspective: a scoping review.从全科医学角度提高癌症治疗轨迹中护理质量的医疗实践:范围综述。
Scand J Prim Health Care. 2022 Mar;40(1):11-28. doi: 10.1080/02813432.2022.2036421. Epub 2022 Mar 7.

本文引用的文献

1
Providing end-of-life care in general practice: findings of a national GP questionnaire survey.在全科医疗中提供临终关怀:一项全国全科医生问卷调查的结果
Br J Gen Pract. 2016 Sep;66(650):e647-53. doi: 10.3399/bjgp16X686113. Epub 2016 Jul 5.
2
Tackling the crisis in general practice.应对全科医疗危机。
BMJ. 2016 Feb 17;352:i942. doi: 10.1136/bmj.i942.
3
Patient and caregiver perspectives on managing pain in advanced cancer: A qualitative longitudinal study.患者及照料者对晚期癌症疼痛管理的看法:一项定性纵向研究
Palliat Med. 2016 Sep;30(8):711-9. doi: 10.1177/0269216316628407. Epub 2016 Feb 4.
4
Early identification of palliative care needs by family physicians: A qualitative study of barriers and facilitators from the perspective of family physicians, community nurses, and patients.家庭医生对姑息治疗需求的早期识别:一项从家庭医生、社区护士和患者角度对障碍与促进因素的定性研究。
Palliat Med. 2014 Jun;28(6):480-490. doi: 10.1177/0269216314522318.
5
Managing pain in advanced cancer: a survey of United kingdom general practitioners and community nurses.晚期癌症患者的疼痛管理:对英国全科医生和社区护士的调查。
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2013 Sep;46(3):345-54. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2012.09.004. Epub 2012 Nov 27.
6
Factors supporting good partnership working between generalist and specialist palliative care services: a systematic review.支持全科和专科姑息治疗服务之间良好伙伴关系的因素:系统评价。
Br J Gen Pract. 2012 May;62(598):e353-62. doi: 10.3399/bjgp12X641474.
7
Treatment of cancer pain.癌症疼痛的治疗。
Lancet. 2011 Jun 25;377(9784):2236-47. doi: 10.1016/S0140-6736(11)60236-5.
8
Review: improving end-of-life care: a critical review of the gold standards framework in primary care.综述:改善临终关怀:初级保健中黄金标准框架的批判性评价。
Palliat Med. 2010 Apr;24(3):317-29. doi: 10.1177/0269216310362005. Epub 2010 Feb 15.
9
A national facilitation project to improve primary palliative care: impact of the Gold Standards Framework on process and self-ratings of quality.一项改善初级姑息治疗的全国性促进项目:黄金标准框架对流程和质量自评的影响。
Qual Saf Health Care. 2009 Jun;18(3):174-80. doi: 10.1136/qshc.2007.024836.
10
Patient-related barriers to cancer pain management: a systematic exploratory review.癌症疼痛管理中与患者相关的障碍:一项系统性探索性综述。
Scand J Caring Sci. 2009 Mar;23(1):190-208. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6712.2008.00601.x. Epub 2008 Sep 10.

初级姑息治疗团队对社区中晚期癌症患者的协调与管理的看法:一项定性研究

Primary palliative care team perspectives on coordinating and managing people with advanced cancer in the community: a qualitative study.

作者信息

Hackett Julia, Ziegler Lucy, Godfrey Mary, Foy Robbie, Bennett Michael I

机构信息

Martin House Research Centre, Social Policy Research Unit, University of York, York, YO10 5DD, UK.

Academic Unit of Palliative Care, Leeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Level 10 Worsley Building, Clarendon Way, Leeds, LS2 9NL, UK.

出版信息

BMC Fam Pract. 2018 Nov 20;19(1):177. doi: 10.1186/s12875-018-0861-z.

DOI:10.1186/s12875-018-0861-z
PMID:30458718
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6247763/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Primary health care teams are key to the delivery of care for patients with advanced cancer during the last year of life. The Gold Standards Framework is proposed as a mechanism for coordinating and guiding identification, assessment, and support. There are still considerable variations in practice despite its introduction. The aim of this qualitative study is to improve understanding of variations in practice through exploring the perspectives and experiences of members of primary health care teams involved in the care of patients with advanced cancer.

METHODS

Qualitative, semi-structured interviews, focus groups, and non-participatory observations involving 67 members of primary health care teams providing palliative care. Data were analysed using a grounded theory approach.

RESULTS

We identified distinct differences in the drivers and barriers of community advanced cancer care coordination, which relate to identification and management, and access to effective pain management, and go some way to understanding variations in practice. These include proactive identification processes, time and resource pressures, unclear roles and responsibilities, poor multidisciplinary working, and inflexible models for referral and prescribing. These provide valuable insight into how professionals work together and independently within an infrastructure that can both support and hinder the provision of effective community palliative care.

CONCLUSIONS

Whilst the GSF is a guide for good practice, alone it is not a mechanism for change. Rather it provides a framework for describing quality of practice that was already occurring. Consequently, there will continue to be variations in practice.

摘要

背景

基层医疗团队是为晚期癌症患者在生命的最后一年提供护理的关键。黄金标准框架被提议作为一种协调和指导识别、评估及支持工作的机制。尽管已经引入该框架,但实践中仍存在相当大的差异。这项定性研究的目的是通过探索参与晚期癌症患者护理的基层医疗团队成员的观点和经验,增进对实践差异的理解。

方法

对67名提供姑息治疗的基层医疗团队成员进行定性的半结构化访谈、焦点小组讨论和非参与性观察。采用扎根理论方法对数据进行分析。

结果

我们确定了社区晚期癌症护理协调的驱动因素和障碍存在明显差异,这些差异与识别和管理、有效疼痛管理的获取有关,在一定程度上有助于理解实践中的差异。这些因素包括积极的识别流程、时间和资源压力、角色和职责不明确、多学科协作不佳以及转诊和开处方模式缺乏灵活性。这些为了解专业人员如何在一个既能支持又会阻碍有效社区姑息治疗提供的基础设施内共同工作和独立工作提供了宝贵的见解。

结论

虽然黄金标准框架是良好实践的指南,但仅凭它本身并不是变革的机制。相反,它提供了一个描述已经存在的实践质量的框架。因此,实践中仍将存在差异。