Waller Amy, Hobden Breanne, Fakes Kristy, Clark Katherine
Health Behaviour Research Collaborative, College of Health Medicine and Wellbeing, University of Newcastle, Callaghan, NSW, Australia.
Hunter Medical Research Institute, New Lambton Heights, NSW, Australia.
Front Cardiovasc Med. 2022 Apr 13;9:878428. doi: 10.3389/fcvm.2022.878428. eCollection 2022.
The impetus to develop and implement tools for non-malignant patient groups is reflected in the increasing number of instruments being developed for heart failure and chronic respiratory diseases. Evidence syntheses of psychometric quality and clinical utility of these tools is required to inform research and clinical practice.
This systematic review examined palliative care needs tools for people diagnosed with advanced heart failure or chronic respiratory diseases, to determine their: (1) psychometric quality; and (2) acceptability, feasibility and clinical utility when implemented in clinical practice.
Systematic searches of MEDLINE, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane and PsycINFO from database inception until June 2021 were undertaken. Additionally, the reference lists of included studies were searched for relevant articles. Psychometric properties of identified measures were evaluated against pre-determined and standard criteria.
Eighteen tools met inclusion criteria: 11 were developed to assess unmet patient palliative care needs. Of those, 6 were generic, 4 were developed for heart failure and 1 was developed for interstitial lung disease. Seven tools identified those who may benefit from palliative care and include general and disease-specific indicators. The psychometric qualities of the tools varied. None met all of the accepted criteria for psychometric rigor in heart failure or respiratory disease populations. There is limited implementation of needs assessment tools in practice.
Several tools were identified, however further validation studies in heart failure and respiratory disease populations are required. Rigorous evaluation to determine the impact of adopting a systematic needs-based approach for heart failure and lung disease on the physical and psychosocial outcomes of patients and carers, as well as the economic costs and benefits to the healthcare system, is required.
为非恶性疾病患者群体开发和实施相关工具的动力,体现在针对心力衰竭和慢性呼吸道疾病开发的工具数量不断增加。需要对这些工具的心理测量质量和临床效用进行证据综合,以为研究和临床实践提供信息。
本系统评价考察了针对被诊断为晚期心力衰竭或慢性呼吸道疾病患者的姑息治疗需求工具,以确定其:(1)心理测量质量;以及(2)在临床实践中实施时的可接受性、可行性和临床效用。
对MEDLINE、CINAHL、Embase、Cochrane和PsycINFO进行了系统检索,检索时间从数据库建立至2021年6月。此外,还检索了纳入研究的参考文献列表以查找相关文章。根据预先确定的标准和标准准则对所识别测量工具的心理测量特性进行评估。
18种工具符合纳入标准:11种是为评估患者未满足的姑息治疗需求而开发的。其中,6种是通用型,4种是针对心力衰竭开发的,1种是针对间质性肺病开发的。7种工具识别出可能从姑息治疗中受益的人群,并包括一般和疾病特异性指标。这些工具的心理测量质量各不相同。在心力衰竭或呼吸道疾病人群中,没有一种工具符合心理测量严谨性的所有公认标准。需求评估工具在实践中的应用有限。
识别出了几种工具,但仍需要在心力衰竭和呼吸道疾病人群中进行进一步的验证研究。需要进行严格评估,以确定采用基于需求的系统方法对心力衰竭和肺病患者及其护理人员的身体和心理社会结局的影响,以及对医疗保健系统的经济成本和效益。