Suppr超能文献

干预措施以减少癌症终末期患者的激进治疗:系统评价。

Interventions to reduce aggressive care at end of life among patients with cancer: a systematic review.

机构信息

Division of Hospital Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Institute for Healthcare Policy and Innovation, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA; Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

Department of Internal Medicine, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI, USA.

出版信息

Lancet Oncol. 2019 Nov;20(11):e627-e636. doi: 10.1016/S1470-2045(19)30496-6.

Abstract

Little is known about effective interventions to reduce aggressive end-of-life care in patients with cancer. We did a systematic review to assess what interventions are associated with reductions in aggressive end-of-life cancer care. We searched MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Scopus, and PsychINFO for randomised control trials (RCTs), quasi-experimental, and observational studies published before Jan 19, 2018, which aimed to improve measures of aggressive end-of-life care for patients with cancer. We developed a taxonomy of interventions using the Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety (SEIPS) model to summarise existing interventions that addressed aggressive care for patients with cancer. Of the 6451 studies identified by our search, five RCTs and 31 observational studies met the final inclusion criteria. Using the SEIPS framework, 16 subcategories of interventions were identified. With the exception of documentation of end-of-life discussions in the electronic medical record, no single intervention type or SEIPS domain led to consistent improvements in aggressive end-of-life care measures. The ability to discern the interventions' effectiveness was limited by inconsistent use of validated measures of aggressive care. Seven (23%) of 31 observational studies and no RCTs were at low risk of bias according to Cochrane's Risk of Bias tool. Evidence for improving aggressive end-of-life cancer care is limited by the absence of standardised measurements and poor study design. Policies and studies to address the gaps present in end-of-life care for cancer are necessary.

摘要

目前对于减少癌症患者激进行为临终关怀的有效干预措施知之甚少。我们进行了系统评价,以评估哪些干预措施与减少癌症患者激进行为临终关怀相关。我们在 MEDLINE、CINAHL、Embase、Scopus 和 PsychINFO 中检索了发表于 2018 年 1 月 19 日之前的随机对照试验(RCT)、准实验和观察性研究,旨在改善癌症患者激进行为临终关怀的评估措施。我们使用患者安全系统工程倡议(SEIPS)模型制定了一个干预措施分类法,以总结现有的针对癌症患者激进行为的干预措施。在我们的检索中,有 6451 项研究被确定,其中 5 项 RCT 和 31 项观察性研究符合最终纳入标准。使用 SEIPS 框架,确定了 16 个子类别的干预措施。除了在电子病历中记录临终讨论外,没有单一的干预类型或 SEIPS 领域能持续改善激进行为临终关怀措施。由于缺乏对激进行为的有效评估,因此难以确定干预措施的有效性。根据 Cochrane 偏倚风险工具,31 项观察性研究中有 7 项(23%)和没有 RCT 处于低偏倚风险。由于缺乏标准化的测量方法和较差的研究设计,改善癌症激进行为临终关怀的证据受到限制。需要制定政策和研究来解决癌症临终关怀中存在的差距。

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