• 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

“我们决定优化”——培训养老院工作人员在痴呆症护理中进行预先护理计划谈话的共同决策技能:一项预试验后测试的群组随机试验方案。

'We DECide optimized' - training nursing home staff in shared decision-making skills for advance care planning conversations in dementia care: protocol of a pretest-posttest cluster randomized trial.

机构信息

LUCAS, KU Leuven, Minderbroedersstraat 8, 3000, Leuven, Belgium.

出版信息

BMC Geriatr. 2019 Feb 4;19(1):33. doi: 10.1186/s12877-019-1044-z.

DOI:10.1186/s12877-019-1044-z
PMID:30717700
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC6360673/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Due to the gradual loss of function, it is crucial for persons with dementia to discuss advance care planning in due course. However, nursing home staff, residents and their families feel uncomfortable to start this type of conversation, resulting in unknown (care) preferences. 'We DECide optimized' will provide tools to nursing home staff for discussing advance care planning. The primary objective is to enhance the level of shared decision-making in advance care planning conversations. We hypothesize that the training will enhance the perception of the importance, competence and frequency in which participants engage in advance care planning conversations. The secondary objective is to assess barriers and facilitators in the implementation of advance care planning policies at the ward level.

METHODS

'We DECide optimized' will consist of two four-hour workshops and a homework assignment between sessions. Training components will include information on advance care planning and shared decision-making, role-play exercises and group discussions on implementation barriers at the ward level. Participating wards will receive supporting materials to stimulate residents and their families to initiate conversations. The study uses a cluster randomized controlled design, with 65 Flemish nursing home wards taking part (311 staff members). Data will be collected through a pretest-posttest model, with measurements up to 9 months after training. The RE-AIM framework will be used to evaluate the effectiveness of the implementation. Quantitative and qualitative data at the clinical, organizational and resident level will be collected.

DISCUSSION

This study describes a hands-on, in-depth and multi-level training approach to improve shared decision-making in advance care planning conversations. By providing tools to ward staff, engaging the management and informing residents and their families, 'We DECide optimized' aims to decrease evidence-based barriers and to provide all stakeholders with incentives to engage in conversations about (care) preferences in an informative and participatory manner.

摘要

背景

由于功能逐渐丧失,痴呆症患者在适当的时候讨论预先护理计划至关重要。然而,养老院工作人员、居民及其家属在开始此类对话时感到不舒服,导致未知的(护理)偏好。“我们决定优化”将为养老院工作人员提供讨论预先护理计划的工具。主要目标是提高预先护理计划对话中共享决策的水平。我们假设培训将增强参与者对预先护理计划对话的重要性、能力和频率的感知。次要目标是评估病房层面实施预先护理计划政策的障碍和促进因素。

方法

“我们决定优化”将包括两个四小时的研讨会和一个课程之间的作业。培训内容将包括预先护理计划和共享决策信息、角色扮演练习以及病房层面实施障碍的小组讨论。参与病房将收到支持材料,以激发居民及其家属发起对话。该研究采用集群随机对照设计,共有 65 个佛兰芒养老院病房参与(311 名工作人员)。通过预测试后测试模型收集数据,培训后最长可达 9 个月进行测量。将使用 RE-AIM 框架评估实施的有效性。将在临床、组织和居民层面收集定量和定性数据。

讨论

本研究描述了一种实用、深入和多层次的培训方法,以改善预先护理计划对话中的共享决策。通过为病房工作人员提供工具、让管理人员参与并告知居民及其家属,“我们决定优化”旨在减少循证障碍,并为所有利益相关者提供激励,以信息丰富和参与的方式就(护理)偏好进行对话。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/674b/6360673/2b6586917b01/12877_2019_1044_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/674b/6360673/b10334f03808/12877_2019_1044_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/674b/6360673/dc8781afa074/12877_2019_1044_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/674b/6360673/2b6586917b01/12877_2019_1044_Fig3_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/674b/6360673/b10334f03808/12877_2019_1044_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/674b/6360673/dc8781afa074/12877_2019_1044_Fig2_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/674b/6360673/2b6586917b01/12877_2019_1044_Fig3_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
'We DECide optimized' - training nursing home staff in shared decision-making skills for advance care planning conversations in dementia care: protocol of a pretest-posttest cluster randomized trial.“我们决定优化”——培训养老院工作人员在痴呆症护理中进行预先护理计划谈话的共同决策技能:一项预试验后测试的群组随机试验方案。
BMC Geriatr. 2019 Feb 4;19(1):33. doi: 10.1186/s12877-019-1044-z.
2
Improving shared decision-making in advance care planning: Implementation of a cluster randomized staff intervention in dementia care.改善预先医疗照护计划中的共同决策:在痴呆症护理中实施一项群组随机式员工干预。
Patient Educ Couns. 2020 Apr;103(4):839-847. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2019.11.024. Epub 2019 Nov 26.
3
Shared decision-making in advance care planning for persons with dementia in nursing homes: a cross-sectional study.养老院痴呆症患者的预先护理计划中的共同决策:一项横断面研究。
BMC Geriatr. 2020 Oct 2;20(1):381. doi: 10.1186/s12877-020-01797-0.
4
Study protocol for 'we DECide': implementation of advance care planning for nursing home residents with dementia.“我们做决定”研究方案:为患有痴呆症的养老院居民实施预先护理计划。
J Adv Nurs. 2015 May;71(5):1156-68. doi: 10.1111/jan.12601. Epub 2014 Dec 23.
5
Advance care planning for nursing home residents with dementia: Influence of 'we DECide' on policy and practice.为患有痴呆症的养老院居民进行预先护理规划:“我们做决定”对政策和实践的影响。
Patient Educ Couns. 2017 Jan;100(1):139-146. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.08.010. Epub 2016 Aug 10.
6
Advance care planning for nursing home residents with dementia: policy vs. practice.为患有痴呆症的养老院居民制定预先护理计划:政策与实践
J Adv Nurs. 2016 Mar;72(3):569-81. doi: 10.1111/jan.12854. Epub 2015 Nov 12.
7
Implementing advance care planning in nursing homes - study protocol of a cluster-randomized clinical trial.在养老院实施预先医疗照护计划 - 一项群组随机临床试验研究方案。
BMC Geriatr. 2018 Aug 13;18(1):180. doi: 10.1186/s12877-018-0869-1.
8
Improved patient participation through advance care planning in nursing homes-A cluster randomized clinical trial.通过养老院中的预先护理计划提高患者参与度-一项集群随机临床试验。
Patient Educ Couns. 2019 Dec;102(12):2183-2191. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2019.06.001. Epub 2019 Jun 6.
9
Shared decision-making in dementia care planning: barriers and facilitators in two European countries.痴呆症护理规划中的共同决策:两个欧洲国家的障碍与促进因素
Aging Ment Health. 2017 Jan;21(1):31-39. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2016.1255715. Epub 2016 Nov 21.
10
Description of an advance care planning intervention in nursing homes: outcomes of the process evaluation.养老院中预先医疗照护计划干预的描述:过程评估结果。
BMC Geriatr. 2018 Jan 25;18(1):26. doi: 10.1186/s12877-018-0713-7.

引用本文的文献

1
Evaluating an advance care planning website for people with dementia and their caregivers: Protocol for a mixed method study.评估面向痴呆症患者及其照护者的预立医疗计划网站:一项混合方法研究的方案
Digit Health. 2023 Aug 28;9:20552076231197021. doi: 10.1177/20552076231197021. eCollection 2023 Jan-Dec.
2
Factors influencing the deterioration from cognitive decline of normal aging to dementia among nursing home residents.影响养老院居民正常衰老认知能力下降发展为痴呆的因素。
BMC Geriatr. 2020 Nov 18;20(1):479. doi: 10.1186/s12877-020-01875-3.
3
Shared decision-making in advance care planning for persons with dementia in nursing homes: a cross-sectional study.

本文引用的文献

1
A three-talk model for shared decision making: multistage consultation process.一种用于共同决策的三阶段谈话模型:多阶段咨询过程。
BMJ. 2017 Nov 6;359:j4891. doi: 10.1136/bmj.j4891.
2
Definition and recommendations for advance care planning: an international consensus supported by the European Association for Palliative Care.预先医疗照护计划的定义和建议:欧洲缓和医疗协会支持的国际共识。
Lancet Oncol. 2017 Sep;18(9):e543-e551. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(17)30582-X.
3
Preconditions for successful advance care planning in nursing homes: A systematic review.
养老院痴呆症患者的预先护理计划中的共同决策:一项横断面研究。
BMC Geriatr. 2020 Oct 2;20(1):381. doi: 10.1186/s12877-020-01797-0.
4
Family Members' Experience of Discussions on End-of-Life Care in Nursing Homes in Japan: A Qualitative Descriptive Study of Family Members' Narratives.家庭成员在日本养老院参与临终关怀讨论的体验:对家庭成员叙述的定性描述性研究。
J Hosp Palliat Nurs. 2020 Oct;22(5):401-406. doi: 10.1097/NJH.0000000000000677.
5
A Structured Tool for Communication and Care Planning in the Era of the COVID-19 Pandemic.在 COVID-19 大流行时代的沟通和护理计划结构化工具。
J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2020 Jul;21(7):943-947. doi: 10.1016/j.jamda.2020.05.062. Epub 2020 Jun 4.
养老院中成功的预先医疗护理计划的前提条件:系统评价。
Int J Nurs Stud. 2017 Jan;66:47-59. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2016.12.003. Epub 2016 Dec 8.
4
Shared decision-making in dementia care planning: barriers and facilitators in two European countries.痴呆症护理规划中的共同决策:两个欧洲国家的障碍与促进因素
Aging Ment Health. 2017 Jan;21(1):31-39. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2016.1255715. Epub 2016 Nov 21.
5
Advance care planning for nursing home residents with dementia: Influence of 'we DECide' on policy and practice.为患有痴呆症的养老院居民进行预先护理规划:“我们做决定”对政策和实践的影响。
Patient Educ Couns. 2017 Jan;100(1):139-146. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2016.08.010. Epub 2016 Aug 10.
6
OPTION(5) versus OPTION(12) instruments to appreciate the extent to which healthcare providers involve patients in decision-making.比较选项(5)和选项(12)的手段,以了解医疗保健提供者让患者参与决策的程度。
Patient Educ Couns. 2016 Jun;99(6):1062-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2015.12.019. Epub 2015 Dec 30.
7
Advance care planning for nursing home residents with dementia: policy vs. practice.为患有痴呆症的养老院居民制定预先护理计划:政策与实践
J Adv Nurs. 2016 Mar;72(3):569-81. doi: 10.1111/jan.12854. Epub 2015 Nov 12.
8
Dutch Translation and Psychometric Testing of the 9-Item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) and Shared Decision Making Questionnaire-Physician Version (SDM-Q-Doc) in Primary and Secondary Care.9项共同决策问卷(SDM-Q-9)和共同决策问卷-医生版(SDM-Q-Doc)在初级和二级医疗保健中的荷兰语翻译及心理测量测试
PLoS One. 2015 Jul 7;10(7):e0132158. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0132158. eCollection 2015.
9
The psychometric properties of Observer OPTION(5), an observer measure of shared decision making.观察者 OPTION(5) 的心理测量特性,这是一种关于共同决策的观察者测量方法。
Patient Educ Couns. 2015 Aug;98(8):970-6. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2015.04.010. Epub 2015 Apr 29.
10
Barriers to advance care planning at the end of life: an explanatory systematic review of implementation studies.临终时预先护理计划的障碍:实施研究的解释性系统评价
PLoS One. 2015 Feb 13;10(2):e0116629. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0116629. eCollection 2015.