Suppr超能文献

如何才能善终?一项关于死亡质量条件的系统评价综述。

What would it take to die well? A systematic review of systematic reviews on the conditions for a good death.

机构信息

Dalla Lana School of Public Health, University of Toronto, ON, Canada.

GENESSIS Foundation, Bogota, Colombia.

出版信息

Lancet Healthy Longev. 2021 Sep;2(9):e593-e600. doi: 10.1016/S2666-7568(21)00097-0.

Abstract

The medicalisation of life under the influence of health-care systems, focused on curing diseases, has made dying well challenging. This systematic review identifies common themes from published systematic reviews about the conditions for a good death as a means to guide decisions around this universal event. MEDLINE, Embase, APA PsycInfo, and AMED were searched for citations with "good death" or "dying well" in their titles on Sept 23, 2020, and complemented with backward reference and forward citation screening with Google Scholar. Articles published in peer-reviewed journals in any language were included. Articles that focused on the identification of conditions for a good death and described how primary studies were sought and selected were also included. Data on general characteristics, quality, and themes were extracted independently. 13 of 275 potentially eligible reviews were included. Common themes were dying at the preferred place, relief from pain and psychological distress, emotional support from loved ones, autonomous treatment decision making, avoidance of futile life-prolonging interventions and of being a burden to others, right to assisted suicide or euthanasia, effective communication with professionals, and performance of rituals. No reviews specified the meaning or timing of death, connected themes, or prioritised them. Vague jargon was often used to describe complex concepts. Most conditions for a good death could be offered to most dying people, without costly medical infrastructure or specialised knowledge. Efforts to describe these conditions clearly, to identify whether there are exceptions or missing items, and whether they apply in non-dominant settings (ie, outstide institutional, affluent, anglophone, and Christian settings) are needed.

摘要

医疗体系以治疗疾病为中心,对生命进行医学干预,使得人们难以安详离世。本系统评价从已发表的有关安详离世条件的系统评价中确定了常见主题,旨在为这一普遍事件的决策提供指导。于 2020 年 9 月 23 日,检索 MEDLINE、Embase、APA PsycInfo 和 AMED 中标题包含“善终”或“安然离世”的参考文献,并通过 Google Scholar 回溯参考文献和前向引文筛查进行补充。纳入所有语言发表在同行评议期刊上的文章。也纳入了关注善终条件的确定,并描述了如何寻找和选择原始研究的文章。独立提取一般特征、质量和主题的数据。从 275 篇潜在合格的综述中选出了 13 篇。常见主题包括在首选地点离世、缓解疼痛和心理困扰、得到亲人的情感支持、自主的治疗决策、避免无益的延长生命干预和不成为他人的负担、有辅助自杀或安乐死的权利、与专业人员进行有效的沟通,以及履行仪式。没有综述明确指定死亡的意义或时间、将主题联系起来或对其进行优先级排序。模糊的行话常被用来描述复杂的概念。大多数善终条件都可以提供给大多数临终者,而无需昂贵的医疗基础设施或专业知识。需要努力更清晰地描述这些条件,确定是否存在例外或缺失的项目,以及它们是否适用于非主导环境(即在机构外、非富裕、非英语和非基督教环境)。

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