Suppr超能文献

比较住院和门诊姑息性镇静治疗的实践 - 一项前瞻性观察性研究。

Comparison of inpatient and outpatient palliative sedation practice - A prospective observational study.

机构信息

Department of Medical Psychology, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.

Clinic for Internal Medicine C - Haematology and Oncology, Stem Cell Transplantation and Palliative Care, University Medicine Greifswald, Greifswald, Germany.

出版信息

Palliat Support Care. 2024 Aug;22(4):637-643. doi: 10.1017/S1478951522001523.

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Palliative sedation (PS) is an intrusive measure to relieve patients at the end of their life from otherwise untreatable symptoms. Intensive discussion of the advantages and limitations of palliative care with the patients and their relatives should precede the initiation of PS since PS is terminated by the patient's death in most cases. Drugs for PS are usually administered intravenously. Midazolam is widely used, either alone or in combination with other substances. PS can be conducted in both inpatient and outpatient settings; however, a quality analysis comparing both modalities was missing so far.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective observational study collected data from patients undergoing PS inpatient at the palliative care unit (PCU,  = 26) or outpatient at a hospice ( = 2) or at home (specialized outpatient palliative care [SAPV],  = 31) between July 2017 and June 2018. Demographical data, indications for PS, and drug protocols were analyzed. The depth of sedation according to the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) and the degree of satisfaction of staff members and patient's relatives were included as parameters for quality assessment.

RESULTS

Patients undergoing PS at the PCU were slightly younger compared to outpatients (hospice and SAPV combined). Most patients suffered from malignant diseases, and midazolam was the backbone of sedation for inpatients and outpatients. The median depth of sedation was between +1 and -3 according to the RASS with a trend to deeper sedation prior to death. The median degree of satisfaction was "good," scored by staff members and by patient's relatives. Significant differences between inpatients and outpatients were not seen in protocols, depth of sedation, and degree of satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

The data support the thesis that PS is possible for inpatients and outpatients with comparable results. For choosing the best place for PS, other aspects such as patient's and relative's wishes, stress, and medical reasons should be considered.

摘要

简介

缓和镇静(PS)是一种侵入性措施,用于缓解生命末期无法治疗的症状。在开始 PS 之前,应与患者及其家属进行关于姑息治疗的优势和局限性的深入讨论,因为在大多数情况下,PS 会随着患者的死亡而终止。PS 药物通常通过静脉注射给药。咪达唑仑被广泛使用,单独使用或与其他物质联合使用。PS 可以在住院和门诊环境中进行;然而,迄今为止,还没有比较这两种方式的质量分析。

患者和方法

这项前瞻性观察研究收集了 2017 年 7 月至 2018 年 6 月期间在姑息治疗病房(PCU,=26)、临终关怀病房(=2)或家中(专门的门诊姑息治疗[SAPV],=31)接受 PS 的患者的数据。分析了人口统计学数据、PS 的适应证和药物方案。根据 Richmond 躁动镇静量表(RASS)评估镇静深度,以及工作人员和患者家属的满意度作为质量评估的参数。

结果

与门诊患者(临终关怀和 SAPV 联合)相比,在 PCU 接受 PS 的患者年龄稍小。大多数患者患有恶性疾病,咪达唑仑是住院患者和门诊患者镇静的基础。根据 RASS,镇静深度中位数在+1 至-3 之间,死前有镇静加深的趋势。工作人员和患者家属的满意度评分中位数为“良好”。在方案、镇静深度和满意度方面,住院患者和门诊患者之间没有显著差异。

结论

这些数据支持 PS 可用于住院患者和门诊患者且结果相当的论点。在选择 PS 的最佳场所时,应考虑患者和家属的意愿、压力和医疗原因等其他方面。

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