Suppr超能文献

临终关怀质量指标:超越死亡地点

End-of-life care quality measures: beyond place of death.

作者信息

Hoare Sarah, Antunes Bárbara, Kelly Michael P, Barclay Stephen

机构信息

The Healthcare Improvement Studies Institute, University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

Palliative & End of Life Care in Cambridge (PELiCam), Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge Department of Public Health and Primary Care, Cambridge, UK.

出版信息

BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2022 Jul 20. doi: 10.1136/spcare-2022-003841.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

How quality in healthcare is measured shapes care provision, including how and what care is delivered. In end-of-life care, appropriate measurement can facilitate effective care and research, and when used in policy, highlight deficits and developments in provision and endorse the discipline necessity. The most prevalent end-of-life quality metric, place of death, is not a quality measure: it gives no indication of the quality of care or patient experience in the place of death.

AIM

To evaluate alternative measures to place of death for assessing quality of care in end-of-life provision in all settings.

METHOD

We examine current end-of-life care quality measures for use as metrics for quality in end-of-life care. We categorise approaches to measurement as either: clinical instruments, mortality follow-back surveys or organisational data. We review each category using four criteria: care setting, patient population, measure feasibility, care quality.

RESULTS

While many of the measure types were highly developed for their specific use, each had limitations for measuring quality of care for a population. Measures were deficient because they lacked potential for reporting end-of-life care for patients not in receipt of specialist palliative care, were reliant on patient-proxy accounts, or were not feasible across all care settings.

CONCLUSION

None of the current end-of-life care metric categories can currently be feasibly used to compare the quality of end-of-life care provision for all patients in all care settings. We recommend the development of a bespoke measure or judicious selection and combination of existing measures for reviewing end-of-life care quality.

摘要

背景

医疗保健质量的衡量方式会影响护理服务的提供,包括护理的方式和内容。在临终关怀中,恰当的衡量能够促进有效的护理和研究,并且应用于政策时,能凸显护理服务中的不足与进展,支持该学科的必要性。最常见的临终质量指标——死亡地点,并非质量衡量指标:它无法表明死亡地点的护理质量或患者体验。

目的

评估除死亡地点之外的其他指标,用于评估所有环境下临终关怀服务的质量。

方法

我们审视当前用于衡量临终关怀服务质量的指标。我们将衡量方法分为以下几类:临床工具、死亡率回溯调查或组织数据。我们使用四个标准对每一类进行审查:护理环境、患者群体、指标可行性、护理质量。

结果

虽然许多指标类型针对其特定用途已高度完善,但每一种在衡量总体护理质量时都存在局限性。这些指标存在缺陷,因为它们缺乏报告未接受专科姑息治疗患者临终关怀情况的可能性,依赖患者代理人的描述,或者在所有护理环境中都不可行。

结论

目前没有任何一类临终关怀指标能够切实可行地用于比较所有护理环境中所有患者的临终关怀服务质量。我们建议开发一种定制指标,或者明智地选择并组合现有指标,以评估临终关怀服务质量。

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