• 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

多学科团队中关于即将死亡的预后决策:范围综述。

Prognostic decision-making about imminent death within multidisciplinary teams: a scoping review.

机构信息

Marie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, Division of Psychiatry, UCL, London, UK

Marie Curie Palliative Care Research Department, Division of Psychiatry, UCL, London, UK.

出版信息

BMJ Open. 2022 Apr 5;12(4):e057194. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057194.

DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057194
PMID:35383077
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC8984043/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

To summarise evidence on how multidisciplinary team (MDTs) make decisions about identification of imminently dying patients.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

SETTING

Any clinical setting providing care for imminently dying patients, excluding studies conducted solely in acute care settings.

DATA SOURCES

The databases AMED, CINAHL, Embase, MEDLINE, PsychINFO and Web of Science were searched from inception to May 2021.Included studies presented original study data written in English and reported on the process or content of MDT discussions about identifying imminently dying adult patients.

RESULTS

40 studies were included in the review. Studies were primarily conducted using interviews and qualitative analysis of themes.MDT members involved in decision-making were usually doctors and nurses. Some decisions focused on professionals recognising that patients were dying, other decisions focused on initiating specific end-of-life care pathways or clarifying care goals. Most decisions provided evidence for a partial collaborative approach, with information-sharing being more common than joint decision-making. Issues with decision-making included disagreement between staff members and the fact that doctors were often regarded as final or sole decision-makers.

CONCLUSIONS

Prognostic decision-making was often not the main focus of included studies. Based on review findings, research explicitly focusing on MDT prognostication by analysing team discussions is needed. The role of allied and other types of healthcare professionals in prognostication needs further investigation as well. A focus on specialist palliative care settings is also necessary.

摘要

目的

总结多学科团队(MDT)在识别即将死亡患者方面做出决策的证据。

设计

范围综述。

设置

任何为即将死亡患者提供护理的临床环境,但不包括仅在急性护理环境中进行的研究。

数据来源

从建库到 2021 年 5 月,检索 AMED、CINAHL、Embase、MEDLINE、PsychINFO 和 Web of Science 数据库。纳入的研究提供了以英文撰写的原始研究数据,并报告了 MDT 关于识别即将死亡成年患者的讨论过程或内容。

结果

综述纳入了 40 项研究。这些研究主要采用访谈和主题的定性分析方法进行。参与决策的 MDT 成员通常是医生和护士。一些决策侧重于专业人员认识到患者即将死亡,其他决策侧重于启动特定的临终关怀途径或明确护理目标。大多数决策提供了部分协作方法的证据,信息共享比联合决策更为常见。决策中的问题包括医务人员之间的意见分歧,以及医生通常被视为最终或唯一决策者的事实。

结论

预测决策通常不是纳入研究的主要重点。基于综述结果,需要研究通过分析团队讨论来明确关注 MDT 预测的研究。需要进一步调查辅助医疗保健专业人员和其他类型的医疗保健专业人员在预测中的作用。还需要关注专科姑息治疗环境。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d923/8984043/7f7d65b0f0dc/bmjopen-2021-057194f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d923/8984043/7f7d65b0f0dc/bmjopen-2021-057194f01.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/d923/8984043/7f7d65b0f0dc/bmjopen-2021-057194f01.jpg

相似文献

1
Prognostic decision-making about imminent death within multidisciplinary teams: a scoping review.多学科团队中关于即将死亡的预后决策:范围综述。
BMJ Open. 2022 Apr 5;12(4):e057194. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2021-057194.
2
Using Palliative Care Needs Rounds in the UK for care home staff and residents: an implementation science study.在英国,使用姑息治疗需求评估小组为养老院工作人员和居民提供服务:一项实施科学研究。
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2024 Jul;12(19):1-134. doi: 10.3310/KRWQ5829.
3
Palliative care experiences of adult cancer patients from ethnocultural groups: a qualitative systematic review protocol.不同种族文化群体成年癌症患者的姑息治疗体验:一项定性系统评价方案
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2015 Jan;13(1):99-111. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2015-1809.
4
Beyond the black stump: rapid reviews of health research issues affecting regional, rural and remote Australia.超越黑木树:影响澳大利亚地区、农村和偏远地区的健康研究问题的快速综述。
Med J Aust. 2020 Dec;213 Suppl 11:S3-S32.e1. doi: 10.5694/mja2.50881.
5
Family members' experiences of surrogate decision-making in hospice care: A systematic review of qualitative studies.临终关怀中家庭成员的替代决策经历:定性研究的系统评价
Int J Nurs Stud. 2025 Feb;162:104987. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2024.104987. Epub 2024 Dec 16.
6
Issues in prognostication for hospital specialist palliative care doctors and nurses: a qualitative inquiry.医院专科姑息治疗医生和护士预后判断中的问题:定性研究。
Palliat Med. 2013 Feb;27(2):165-71. doi: 10.1177/0269216311432898. Epub 2011 Dec 21.
7
Communicating end-of-life care goals and decision-making among a multidisciplinary geriatric inpatient rehabilitation team: A qualitative descriptive study.多学科老年住院康复团队之间沟通临终关怀目标和决策:一项定性描述性研究。
Palliat Med. 2018 Dec;32(10):1615-1623. doi: 10.1177/0269216318790353. Epub 2018 Aug 3.
8
A qualitative systematic review of internal and external influences on shared decision-making in all health care settings.对所有医疗环境中共同决策的内部和外部影响进行的定性系统评价。
JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2012;10(58):4633-4646. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2012-432.
9
End-of-Life Decision Making in Palliative Care and Recommendations of the Council of Europe: Qualitative Secondary Analysis of Interviews and Observation Field Notes.终末期决策制定在姑息治疗和欧洲理事会的建议:访谈和观察现场记录的定性二次分析。
J Palliat Med. 2018 May;21(5):604-615. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2017.0403. Epub 2018 Jan 3.
10
Palliative care nursing involvement in end-of-life decision-making: Qualitative secondary analysis.姑息护理护理在临终决策中的参与:定性二次分析。
Nurs Ethics. 2019 Sep;26(6):1680-1695. doi: 10.1177/0969733018774610. Epub 2018 May 28.

引用本文的文献

1
From MINI to Meaningful Change-A German Pilot Study to Improve Patient Outcomes in End-of-Life Care.从MINI到有意义的改变——一项旨在改善临终关怀患者结局的德国试点研究
Healthcare (Basel). 2025 Aug 16;13(16):2024. doi: 10.3390/healthcare13162024.
2
Initiating Prognostic Talk During Hospice Multidisciplinary Team Meetings: A Conversation Analytic Study.临终关怀多学科团队会议期间启动预后讨论:一项会话分析研究
J Palliat Care. 2025 Apr;40(2):183-189. doi: 10.1177/08258597241286347. Epub 2024 Nov 14.
3
Examining the Role of Stress and Team Support in Decision Making under Uncertainty and Time Pressure.

本文引用的文献

1
Moral distress among nurses: A mixed-methods study.护士群体中的道德困境:一项混合方法研究。
Nurs Ethics. 2021 Nov-Dec;28(7-8):1165-1182. doi: 10.1177/0969733021996028. Epub 2021 Apr 23.
2
Updated methodological guidance for the conduct of scoping reviews.范围综述实施的更新方法学指南。
JBI Evid Synth. 2020 Oct;18(10):2119-2126. doi: 10.11124/JBIES-20-00167.
3
A critical exploration of professional jurisdictions and role boundaries in inter-professional end-of-life care in the community.对社区跨专业临终关怀中专业管辖权和角色界限的批判性探索。
审视压力和团队支持在不确定性和时间压力下决策过程中的作用。
MDM Policy Pract. 2024 Sep 2;9(2):23814683241273575. doi: 10.1177/23814683241273575. eCollection 2024 Jul-Dec.
4
Time estimates in prognostic discussions: A conversation analytic study of hospice multidisciplinary team meetings.时间估计在预后讨论中:临终关怀多学科团队会议的会话分析研究。
Palliat Med. 2024 May;38(5):593-601. doi: 10.1177/02692163241248523.
5
Accuracy of clinical predictions of prognosis at the end-of-life: evidence from routinely collected data in urgent care records.临终预后临床预测的准确性:来自紧急护理记录中常规收集数据的证据。
BMC Palliat Care. 2023 Apr 26;22(1):51. doi: 10.1186/s12904-023-01155-y.
Soc Sci Med. 2020 Dec;266:113300. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2020.113300. Epub 2020 Aug 31.
4
The ethics of DNR-decisions in oncology and hematology care: a qualitative study.肿瘤学和血液学护理中放弃心肺复苏决策的伦理:一项定性研究。
BMC Med Ethics. 2020 Jul 31;21(1):66. doi: 10.1186/s12910-020-00508-z.
5
Prognosticating for Adult Patients With Advanced Incurable Cancer: a Needed Oncologist Skill.预测晚期不可治愈癌症成年患者的预后:肿瘤医生所需的技能。
Curr Treat Options Oncol. 2020 Jan 16;21(1):5. doi: 10.1007/s11864-019-0698-2.
6
Multidisciplinary meetings at the emergency department: A conversation-analytic study of decision-making.多学科急诊会议:决策的会话分析研究。
Soc Sci Med. 2019 Dec;242:112589. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2019.112589. Epub 2019 Oct 4.
7
Team approaches in palliative care: a review of the literature.姑息治疗中的团队协作方法:文献综述
Int J Palliat Nurs. 2019 Sep 2;25(9):444-451. doi: 10.12968/ijpn.2019.25.9.444.
8
Prognostication in palliative care.姑息治疗中的预后。
Clin Med (Lond). 2019 Jul;19(4):306-310. doi: 10.7861/clinmedicine.19-4-306.
9
Systematic review or scoping review? Guidance for authors when choosing between a systematic or scoping review approach.系统评价或范围综述?在选择系统评价或范围综述方法时,作者的指南。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2018 Nov 19;18(1):143. doi: 10.1186/s12874-018-0611-x.
10
Clinical decision-making at the end of life: a mixed-methods study.临终时的临床决策:一项混合方法研究。
BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2020 Sep;10(3):e26. doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2018-001535. Epub 2018 Oct 18.