Johnston Bridget M, McCauley Rachel, McQuillan Regina, Rabbitte Mary, Honohan Caitriona, Mockler David, Thomas Steve, May Peter
Centre for Health Policy and Management, Trinity College Dublin, University of Dublin, Dublin, D2, Ireland.
Palliative Medicine, St Francis Hospice, Dublin, D05 T9K8, Ireland.
HRB Open Res. 2020 Mar 13;3:9. doi: 10.12688/hrbopenres.13006.1. eCollection 2020.
Out-of-hours palliative care is a priority for patients, caregivers and policymakers. Approximately three quarters of the week occurs outside of typical working hours, and the need for support in care of serious and terminal illness during these times is commonplace. Evidence on relevant interventions is unclear. To review systematically the evidence on the effect of out-of-hours specialist or generalist palliative care for adults on patient and caregiver outcomes, and costs and cost-effectiveness. A systematic review of peer-reviewed and grey literature was conducted. We searched Embase, MEDLINE [Ovid], Cochrane Library, CINAHL, Allied and Complementary Medicine [Ovid], PsycINFO, Web of Science, Scopus, EconLit (Ovid), and grey literature published between 1 January 2000 and 12 November 2019. Studies that comparatively evaluated the effect of out-of-hours specialist or generalist palliative care for adults on patient and caregiver outcomes, and on costs and cost-effectiveness were eligible, irrespective of design. Only English-language studies were eligible. Two reviewers independently examined the returned studies at each stage (title and abstract review, full-text review, and quality assessment). We identified one eligible peer-reviewed study, judged as insufficient quality. Other sources returned no eligible material. The systematic review therefore included no studies. The importance of integrated, 24-hour care for people in line with a palliative care approach is not reflected in the literature, which lacks evidence on the effects of interventions provided outside typical working hours. PROSPERO CRD42018111041.
非工作时间的姑息治疗是患者、护理人员和政策制定者的优先事项。一周中大约四分之三的时间是在非典型工作时间之外,在此期间对严重和晚期疾病护理的支持需求很常见。关于相关干预措施的证据尚不清楚。为了系统回顾关于非工作时间成人专科或全科姑息治疗对患者和护理人员结局、成本及成本效益影响的证据。对同行评审文献和灰色文献进行了系统回顾。我们检索了Embase、MEDLINE [Ovid]、Cochrane图书馆、CINAHL、联合与补充医学 [Ovid]、PsycINFO、科学引文索引、Scopus、EconLit (Ovid) 以及2000年1月1日至2019年11月12日发表的灰色文献。比较评估非工作时间成人专科或全科姑息治疗对患者和护理人员结局、成本及成本效益影响的研究均符合要求,不考虑研究设计。仅英文研究符合要求。两名评审员在每个阶段(标题和摘要评审、全文评审及质量评估)独立审查返回的研究。我们确定了一项符合要求的同行评审研究,但判定其质量不足。其他来源未返回符合要求的材料。因此,该系统回顾未纳入任何研究。符合姑息治疗方法的综合24小时护理对人们的重要性在文献中未得到体现,文献缺乏关于非典型工作时间提供的干预措施效果的证据。国际系统评价注册库编号:CRD42018111041。