Suppr超能文献

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.

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。

相似文献

本文引用的文献

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.
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.

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验