Division of Anesthesiology, Department of Anesthesiology, Pharmacology, Intensive Care and Emergency Medicine, Geneva University Hospitals, Rue Gabrielle-Perret-Gentil 4, 1205, Geneva, Switzerland.
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2023 Jan 25;7(1):5. doi: 10.1186/s41687-023-00539-1.
BACKGROUND: Decision-making concerning relatives undergoing surgery is challenging. It remains unclear to what extent implicated next of kin eventually regret their decisions and how this regret is assessed. Our aim was to systematically review the literature on decisional regret of next of kin and to describe the assessment tools used and the surgical populations studied. METHODS: We included interventional or observational, quantitative or qualitative studies reporting the measurement of decisional regret of next of kin concerning relatives undergoing surgery. We searched a variety of databases without restriction on publication year. We assessed the quality of reporting of quantitative studies using the NIH Quality Assessment Tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies and of qualitative studies using the Critical Appraisal Skills Program Checklist. RESULTS: Thirteen cross-sectional, five prospective cohorts and five qualitative studies matched our inclusion criteria. In 18 studies (78%), patients were children, in five (22%), young or middle-aged adults. No study included elderly or frail patients. Thirteen studies (57%) used the original Decision Regret Scale which was validated for patients, but not for next of kin. Only 3 of the 18 (17%) quantitative studies and only one of the 4 (25%) qualitative studies were rated as "good" in the quality assessment. CONCLUSION: None of the retrieved studies used validated tools to assess the decisional regret of next of kin and none of them examined this issue in elderly or frail surgical patients.
背景:涉及亲属手术的决策具有挑战性。目前尚不清楚亲属在多大程度上最终会对他们的决定感到后悔,以及如何评估这种后悔。我们的目的是系统地回顾有关亲属手术的亲属决策后悔的文献,并描述所使用的评估工具和研究的手术人群。
方法:我们纳入了报告亲属手术的亲属决策后悔测量的干预性或观察性、定量或定性研究。我们在没有出版年限限制的情况下搜索了各种数据库。我们使用 NIH 观察性队列和横断面研究质量评估工具评估定量研究的报告质量,使用批判性评估技能计划清单评估定性研究的报告质量。
结果:符合纳入标准的有 13 项横断面研究、5 项前瞻性队列研究和 5 项定性研究。在 18 项研究中(78%),患者是儿童,在 5 项研究中(22%),患者是年轻或中年成年人。没有研究包括老年或体弱患者。13 项研究(57%)使用了最初的决策后悔量表,该量表是针对患者进行验证的,但不是针对亲属。在 18 项定量研究中,只有 3 项(17%)和 4 项定性研究中的 1 项(25%)被评为质量评估中的“良好”。
结论:没有一项检索到的研究使用经过验证的工具来评估亲属的决策后悔,也没有一项研究在老年或体弱的手术患者中研究这个问题。
J Patient Rep Outcomes. 2023-1-25
Spine (Phila Pa 1976). 2022-4-15
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2023-5
JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2017-3-1
J Pediatr Urol. 2021-10
Spine Deform. 2020-12
Neurocrit Care. 2021-2
J Pediatr Urol. 2020-4
J Pediatr Urol. 2019-5-2