• 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

患者与医疗保健专业人员视角:肺癌综合护理路径的案例研究

Patient and Health Care Professional Perspectives: A Case Study of the Lung Cancer Integrated Care Pathway.

作者信息

Bravi Francesca, Ruscio Eugenio Di, Frassoldati Antonio, Cavallesco Giorgio Narciso, Valpiani Giorgia, Ferrozzi Anna, Wienand Ulrich, Carradori Tiziano

机构信息

Research Innovation Quality and Accreditation Unit, S. Anna University Hospital of Ferrara, Ferrara, IT.

S. Anna University Hospital of Ferrara, Ferrara, IT.

出版信息

Int J Integr Care. 2018 Oct 31;18(4):7. doi: 10.5334/ijic.3972.

DOI:10.5334/ijic.3972
PMID:30473645
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6234416/
Abstract

INTRODUCTION

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the perception of the quality of care, considering both patient experience and health care professionals' perceptions as well as patient outcome measures of an integrated lung cancer pathway.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was conducted in 2016 at Ferrara University Hospital, Italy. OPportunity for Treatment In ONcology (OPTION) questionnaires were administered to 77 patients, and the Care Process Self-Evaluation Tool (CPSET) questionnaires were given to 38 health care professionals. The effectiveness of the pathway was evaluated by analysing the tool's positive impact on lung cancer surgery volume and 30-day mortality.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven patients were enrolled, and 38 health care professionals assessed the CPSET questionnaire. The highest scores were related to "respect" (100%), "satisfaction" (98.7%), and "trust" (97.4%) on the OPTION and to "patient-focused vision" (97.2%) and "patient engagement" (94.4%) on the CPSET. The lowest scores were related to "information" (26%) and "cooperation with general practitioner" (17.6%) on the OPTION and "cooperation between the hospital and primary care" (23.5%) for the CPSET. The outcomes analysis shows an increase in the volume of activity and a decrease in 30-day mortality after pathway implementation.

DISCUSSION

The lung cancer pathway is a patient-centred intervention that enables care to be shaped for patient needs in order to improve the quality and efficiency of service and clinical outcome.

摘要

引言

本研究的目的是评估对医疗质量的认知,同时考虑患者体验、医疗保健专业人员的看法以及综合肺癌治疗路径的患者结局指标。

方法

2016年在意大利费拉拉大学医院进行了一项横断面研究。对77名患者进行了肿瘤治疗机会(OPTION)问卷调查,并向38名医疗保健专业人员发放了护理过程自我评估工具(CPSET)问卷。通过分析该工具对肺癌手术量和30天死亡率的积极影响来评估该治疗路径的有效性。

结果

纳入了77名患者,38名医疗保健专业人员对CPSET问卷进行了评估。OPTION问卷中得分最高的是“尊重”(100%)、“满意度”(98.7%)和“信任”(97.4%),CPSET问卷中得分最高的是“以患者为中心的愿景”(97.2%)和“患者参与度”(94.4%)。OPTION问卷中得分最低的是“信息”(26%)和“与全科医生的合作”(17.6%),CPSET问卷中得分最低的是“医院与初级保健之间的合作”(23.5%)。结局分析显示,实施该治疗路径后活动量增加,30天死亡率降低。

讨论

肺癌治疗路径是以患者为中心的干预措施,能够根据患者需求调整护理,以提高服务质量和效率以及临床结局。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a479/6234416/b08d07c3497c/ijic-18-4-3972-g4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a479/6234416/341ddc493377/ijic-18-4-3972-g1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a479/6234416/9928ee0ca53e/ijic-18-4-3972-g2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a479/6234416/2c7a6bec5a97/ijic-18-4-3972-g3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a479/6234416/b08d07c3497c/ijic-18-4-3972-g4.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a479/6234416/341ddc493377/ijic-18-4-3972-g1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a479/6234416/9928ee0ca53e/ijic-18-4-3972-g2.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a479/6234416/2c7a6bec5a97/ijic-18-4-3972-g3.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/a479/6234416/b08d07c3497c/ijic-18-4-3972-g4.jpg

相似文献

1
Patient and Health Care Professional Perspectives: A Case Study of the Lung Cancer Integrated Care Pathway.患者与医疗保健专业人员视角:肺癌综合护理路径的案例研究
Int J Integr Care. 2018 Oct 31;18(4):7. doi: 10.5334/ijic.3972.
2
The Care Process Self-Evaluation Tool: a valid and reliable instrument for measuring care process organization of health care teams.护理过程自我评价工具:一种有效且可靠的工具,用于衡量医疗保健团队的护理过程组织。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2013 Aug 19;13:325. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-13-325.
3
Do pathways lead to better organized care processes?路径是否通向更有条理的护理流程?
J Eval Clin Pract. 2009 Oct;15(5):782-8. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2753.2008.01068.x.
4
Promoting and supporting self-management for adults living in the community with physical chronic illness: A systematic review of the effectiveness and meaningfulness of the patient-practitioner encounter.促进和支持社区中患有慢性身体疾病的成年人进行自我管理:对医患互动的有效性和意义的系统评价。
JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2009;7(13):492-582. doi: 10.11124/01938924-200907130-00001.
5
How has the impact of 'care pathway technologies' on service integration in stroke care been measured and what is the strength of the evidence to support their effectiveness in this respect?“护理路径技术”对卒中护理服务整合的影响是如何衡量的,以及有哪些证据支持其在这方面的有效性?
Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2008 Mar;6(1):78-110. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-1609.2007.00098.x.
6
[Continuity of care in oncology. Quantitative analysis of data from patients treated in two different settings in Emilia--Romagna.].[肿瘤学中的连续性护理。对艾米利亚-罗马涅地区两种不同治疗环境下患者数据的定量分析。]
Recenti Prog Med. 2017 Jun;108(6):288-293. doi: 10.1701/2715.27716.
7
The Effectiveness of Integrated Care Pathways for Adults and Children in Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review.综合护理路径在医疗环境中对成人和儿童的有效性:一项系统评价。
JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2009;7(3):80-129. doi: 10.11124/01938924-200907030-00001.
8
Development and validation of a care process self-evaluation tool.一种护理流程自我评估工具的开发与验证
Health Serv Manage Res. 2007 Aug;20(3):189-202. doi: 10.1258/095148407781395964.
9
Evaluation of the impact of a clinical pathway on the organization of a multidisciplinary dental sleep clinic.评估临床路径对多学科牙科睡眠诊所组织的影响。
Sleep Breath. 2014 May;18(2):325-34. doi: 10.1007/s11325-013-0888-2. Epub 2013 Sep 3.
10
The effectiveness of internet-based e-learning on clinician behavior and patient outcomes: a systematic review protocol.基于互联网的电子学习对临床医生行为和患者结局的有效性:一项系统评价方案。
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):52-64. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1919.

引用本文的文献

1
Content validity of patient-reported measures evaluating experiences of the quality of transitions in healthcare settings-a scoping review.评估患者在医疗保健环境中经历的过渡质量的报告测量的内容效度:范围综述。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2024 Jul 22;24(1):828. doi: 10.1186/s12913-024-11298-0.
2
Identifying Modifiable System-Level Barriers to Living Donor Kidney Transplantation.识别活体供肾移植中可改变的系统层面障碍。
Kidney Int Rep. 2022 Sep 9;7(11):2410-2420. doi: 10.1016/j.ekir.2022.08.028. eCollection 2022 Nov.
3
Optimal Care Pathways for People with Lung Cancer- a Scoping Review of the Literature.

本文引用的文献

1
Multidisciplinary management improves survival at 1 year after surgical treatment for non-small-cell lung cancer: a propensity score-matched study.多学科管理可改善非小细胞肺癌手术治疗 1 年后的生存率:一项倾向评分匹配研究。
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2018 Jun 1;53(6):1199-1204. doi: 10.1093/ejcts/ezx464.
2
Validation of the OPportunity for Treatment In ONcology (OPTION) questionnaire measuring continuity of care.肿瘤治疗机会(OPTION)问卷用于衡量医疗连续性的效度验证。
Eur J Cancer Care (Engl). 2018 Jan;27(1). doi: 10.1111/ecc.12765. Epub 2017 Sep 11.
3
Advancing integrated care and its evaluation by means of a universal typology.
肺癌患者的最佳护理路径——文献综述
Int J Integr Care. 2020 Sep 28;20(3):14. doi: 10.5334/ijic.5438.
通过通用类型学推进综合护理及其评估。
Int J Care Coord. 2017 Jun;20(1-2):41-44. doi: 10.1177/2053434517705732. Epub 2017 Apr 27.
4
Better organized care via care pathways: A multicenter study.通过护理路径实现更有序的护理:一项多中心研究。
PLoS One. 2017 Jul 3;12(7):e0180398. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0180398. eCollection 2017.
5
[Continuity of care in oncology. Quantitative analysis of data from patients treated in two different settings in Emilia--Romagna.].[肿瘤学中的连续性护理。对艾米利亚-罗马涅地区两种不同治疗环境下患者数据的定量分析。]
Recenti Prog Med. 2017 Jun;108(6):288-293. doi: 10.1701/2715.27716.
6
Qualitative analysis of 6961 free-text comments from the first National Cancer Patient Experience Survey in Scotland.对苏格兰首次全国癌症患者体验调查中6961条自由文本评论的定性分析。
BMJ Open. 2017 Jun 15;7(6):e015726. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2016-015726.
7
The primary care provider (PCP)-cancer specialist relationship: A systematic review and mixed-methods meta-synthesis.初级保健提供者(PCP)与癌症专科医生的关系:一项系统评价与混合方法的元综合分析。
CA Cancer J Clin. 2017 Mar;67(2):156-169. doi: 10.3322/caac.21385. Epub 2016 Oct 11.
8
Psychometric properties of the Norwegian version of the Care Process Self-Evaluation Tool.挪威版护理过程自我评估工具的心理测量特性。
J Interprof Care. 2016 Nov;30(6):804-811. doi: 10.1080/13561820.2016.1203766. Epub 2016 Jul 26.
9
The relationship between integrated care and cancer patient experience: A scoping review of the evidence.综合护理与癌症患者体验之间的关系:证据的范围综述
Health Policy. 2016 Jan;120(1):55-63. doi: 10.1016/j.healthpol.2015.12.004. Epub 2015 Dec 13.
10
Social Role Theory and Social Role Valorization for Care Management Practice.
Care Manag J. 2015;16(4):184-7. doi: 10.1891/1521-0987.16.4.184.