Group of Pain and Palliative Care, School of Health Sciences, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellín, Colombia.
Faculty of Medicine, Universidad Pontificia Bolivariana, Medellín, Colombia.
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2020 Jan;59(1):152-164. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2019.07.033. Epub 2019 Aug 9.
There is no clear definition of what constitutes a good death or its features. Patients, caregivers, physicians, and relatives have different notions of a good death. Discussions have been driven by academic perspectives, with little research available on the patients' perspectives.
To explore the notions of a good death from the patients' perspective.
A systematic literature search was conducted up to November 2017 using CINAHL®, MEDLINE®, EMBASE®, and PsycINFO® databases. Search terms used were "quality of death," "good death," "quality of dying," or "good dying." Scientific empirical studies that included the exploration of the notion of a good death in adult patients with advanced and life-threatening diseases were selected separately by two researchers. Hawker's et al. criteria were used to assess the quality of articles. The analysis was conducted using a thematic analysis.
Two thousand six hundred and fifty two titles were identified; after elimination of duplicates, screening, and final selection, 29 relevant publications remained for analysis. Sample populations included patients with terminal diseases (AIDS, cardiovascular disease, and cancer). Core elements for a "good death" included control of pain and symptoms, clear decision-making, feeling of closure, being seen and perceived as a person, preparation for death, and being still able to give something to others; whereas other factors such as culture, financial issues, religion, disease, age, and life circumstances were found to shape the concept across groups. Studies agree on the individuality of death and dying while revealing a diverse set of preferences, regarding not only particular attributes but also specific ways in which they contribute to a good death.
Although sharing common core elements, patients' notions of good death are individual, unique, and different. They are dynamic in nature, fluctuating within particular groups and during the actual process of dying. Formal and informal caregivers should carefully follow-up and respect the patient's individual concepts and preferences regarding death and dying, while attending to shared core elements, to better adjust clinical decisions.
对于什么构成了善终以及其特征,目前尚无明确的定义。患者、护理人员、医生和亲属对善终有不同的看法。讨论主要是基于学术观点,而关于患者观点的研究则很少。
从患者的角度探讨善终的概念。
系统检索了截至 2017 年 11 月的 CINAHL®、MEDLINE®、EMBASE®和 PsycINFO®数据库,使用的检索词包括“死亡质量”、“善终”、“临终质量”或“善终”。分别由两名研究人员单独选择纳入成人晚期和危及生命疾病患者探索善终概念的科学实证研究。使用 Hawker 等人的标准评估文章质量。使用主题分析进行分析。
共确定了 2652 个标题;消除重复项、筛选和最终选择后,仍有 29 篇相关文献用于分析。样本人群包括患有终末期疾病(艾滋病、心血管疾病和癌症)的患者。“善终”的核心要素包括控制疼痛和症状、明确决策、有归属感、被视为一个人、为死亡做准备以及仍然能够给予他人;而文化、财务问题、宗教、疾病、年龄和生活环境等其他因素被发现会在不同群体中塑造这一概念。研究一致认为死亡和临终是个体化的,同时揭示了一组多样化的偏好,不仅涉及特定属性,还涉及它们对善终的具体贡献方式。
尽管患者对善终的概念有一些共同的核心要素,但它们是个体化的、独特的和不同的。它们本质上是动态的,在特定群体内以及临终过程中不断变化。正式和非正式的护理人员应该仔细关注和尊重患者对死亡和临终的个人概念和偏好,同时关注共同的核心要素,以更好地调整临床决策。