• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

相似文献

1
Evaluating caregiver-clinician communication for tracheostomy placement in the neonatal intensive care unit: a qualitative inquiry.评估新生儿重症监护病房中经气管切开术置管的医护人员与照护者的沟通:一项定性研究。
J Perinatol. 2024 Jul;44(7):963-969. doi: 10.1038/s41372-023-01793-3. Epub 2023 Oct 13.
2
Evaluating Caregiver-Clinician Communication for Tracheostomy Placement in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: A Qualitative Inquiry.评估新生儿重症监护病房气管切开术安置过程中照顾者与临床医生的沟通:一项定性研究。
Res Sq. 2023 May 4:rs.3.rs-2869532. doi: 10.21203/rs.3.rs-2869532/v1.
3
Parents' and informal caregivers' views and experiences of communication about routine childhood vaccination: a synthesis of qualitative evidence.父母及非正式照料者关于儿童常规疫苗接种沟通的观点与经历:定性证据综述
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017 Feb 7;2(2):CD011787. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD011787.pub2.
4
How lived experiences of illness trajectories, burdens of treatment, and social inequalities shape service user and caregiver participation in health and social care: a theory-informed qualitative evidence synthesis.疾病轨迹的生活经历、治疗负担和社会不平等如何影响服务使用者和照顾者参与健康和社会护理:一项基于理论的定性证据综合分析
Health Soc Care Deliv Res. 2025 Jun;13(24):1-120. doi: 10.3310/HGTQ8159.
5
Survivor, family and professional experiences of psychosocial interventions for sexual abuse and violence: a qualitative evidence synthesis.性虐待和暴力的心理社会干预的幸存者、家庭和专业人员的经验:定性证据综合。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Oct 4;10(10):CD013648. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013648.pub2.
6
Interventions for interpersonal communication about end of life care between health practitioners and affected people.干预健康从业者与受影响者之间关于临终关怀的人际沟通。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2022 Jul 8;7(7):CD013116. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013116.pub2.
7
A Systematic Review of Patient and Caregiver Experiences with a Tracheostomy.气管造口术患者和护理人员体验的系统评价
Patient. 2018 Apr;11(2):175-191. doi: 10.1007/s40271-017-0277-1.
8
The experience of adults who choose watchful waiting or active surveillance as an approach to medical treatment: a qualitative systematic review.选择观察等待或主动监测作为治疗方法的成年人的经历:一项定性系统评价。
JBI Database System Rev Implement Rep. 2016 Feb;14(2):174-255. doi: 10.11124/jbisrir-2016-2270.
9
Factors that influence parents' and informal caregivers' views and practices regarding routine childhood vaccination: a qualitative evidence synthesis.影响父母和非正式照顾者对常规儿童疫苗接种看法和做法的因素:定性证据综合分析。
Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2021 Oct 27;10(10):CD013265. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD013265.pub2.
10
Caregiver-informed meta-synthesis of caregivers' experiences with tracheostomy decision-making in pediatrics.基于照顾者信息的儿科气管造口术决策中照顾者经历的元综合分析
Front Pediatr. 2025 Jun 9;13:1574484. doi: 10.3389/fped.2025.1574484. eCollection 2025.

引用本文的文献

1
"What choice do you have knowing your child can't breathe?!": Adaptation to Parenthood for Children Who Have Received a Tracheostomy.“当你知道自己的孩子无法呼吸时,你还有什么选择?!”:接受气管造口术儿童的父母角色适应
SAGE Open Nurs. 2024 Apr 9;10:23779608241245502. doi: 10.1177/23779608241245502. eCollection 2024 Jan-Dec.

本文引用的文献

1
"What Would Give Her the Best Life?": Understanding Why Families Decline Pediatric Home Ventilation.“怎样能给她最好的生活?”:理解家庭拒绝小儿家庭通气的原因
J Palliat Med. 2023 Jul;26(7):930-940. doi: 10.1089/jpm.2022.0426. Epub 2023 Jan 20.
2
Sample sizes for saturation in qualitative research: A systematic review of empirical tests.定性研究中饱和度的样本量:实证检验的系统综述。
Soc Sci Med. 2022 Jan;292:114523. doi: 10.1016/j.socscimed.2021.114523. Epub 2021 Nov 2.
3
Tracheostomy Decision-making Communication among Patients Receiving Prolonged Mechanical Ventilation.长期机械通气患者的气管切开术决策沟通。
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2021 May;18(5):848-856. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.202009-1217OC.
4
20th Anniversary Ottawa Decision Support Framework: Part 3 Overview of Systematic Reviews and Updated Framework.第 20 届渥太华决策支持框架周年纪念:第 3 部分 系统评价概述和更新框架。
Med Decis Making. 2020 Apr;40(3):379-398. doi: 10.1177/0272989X20911870.
5
Tracheostomy in Infants in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit.新生儿重症监护病房中婴儿的气管切开术。
Neoreviews. 2020 May;21(5):e323-e334. doi: 10.1542/neo.21-5-e323.
6
"This Is How Hard It Is". Family Experience of Hospital-to-Home Transition with a Tracheostomy.“就是这么难”。有气管造口术患者从医院过渡到家庭的家庭经历
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2020 Jul;17(7):860-868. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201910-780OC.
7
Tracheostomy decision making: From placement to decannulation.气管切开术决策:从置管到拔管。
Semin Fetal Neonatal Med. 2019 Oct;24(5):101037. doi: 10.1016/j.siny.2019.101037. Epub 2019 Oct 14.
8
Parental Conflict, Regret, and Short-term Impact on Quality of Life in Tracheostomy Decision-Making.父母冲突、遗憾及其对气管切开术决策短期生活质量的影响。
Pediatr Crit Care Med. 2020 Feb;21(2):136-142. doi: 10.1097/PCC.0000000000002109.
9
Tracheostomy in Extremely Preterm Neonates in the United States: A Cross-Sectional Analysis.美国极早产儿行气管切开术:一项横断面分析。
Laryngoscope. 2020 Aug;130(8):2056-2062. doi: 10.1002/lary.28304. Epub 2019 Sep 18.
10
Decisions for Long-Term Ventilation for Children. Perspectives of Family Members.儿童长期通气决策。家庭成员的观点。
Ann Am Thorac Soc. 2020 Jan;17(1):72-80. doi: 10.1513/AnnalsATS.201903-271OC.

评估新生儿重症监护病房中经气管切开术置管的医护人员与照护者的沟通:一项定性研究。

Evaluating caregiver-clinician communication for tracheostomy placement in the neonatal intensive care unit: a qualitative inquiry.

机构信息

Department of Pediatrics, Division of Newborn Medicine, St. Louis Children's Hospital and Washington University in St. Louis School of Medicine, St. Louis, MO, USA.

College of Health and Human Sciences, Northern Illinois University, DeKalb, IL, USA.

出版信息

J Perinatol. 2024 Jul;44(7):963-969. doi: 10.1038/s41372-023-01793-3. Epub 2023 Oct 13.

DOI:10.1038/s41372-023-01793-3
PMID:37833495
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11014892/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

Identify stakeholders' tracheostomy decision-making information priorities in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit (NICU).

STUDY DESIGN

English-speaking caregivers and clinicians who participated in NICU tracheostomy discussions between January 2017 and December 2021 were eligible. They reviewed a pediatric tracheostomy communication guide prior to meeting. Interviews focused on tracheostomy decision-making experiences, communication preferences, and guide perceptions. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analyzed using iterative inductive/deductive coding to inform thematic analysis.

RESULTS

Ten caregivers and nine clinicians were interviewed. Caregivers were surprised by the severity of their child's diagnosis and the intensive home care required, but proceeded with tracheostomy because it was the only chance for survival. All recommended that tracheostomy information be introduced early and in phases. Inadequate communication limited caregivers' understanding of post-surgical care and discharge requirements. All felt a guide could standardize communication.

CONCLUSIONS

Caregivers seek detailed information regarding expectations after tracheostomy placement in the NICU and at home.

摘要

目的

确定新生儿重症监护病房(NICU)中利益相关者进行气管切开术决策的信息重点。

研究设计

2017 年 1 月至 2021 年 12 月期间参与 NICU 气管切开术讨论的讲英语的护理人员和临床医生有资格参加。他们在开会前查看了小儿气管切开术沟通指南。访谈重点是气管切开术决策经验、沟通偏好和指南认知。使用迭代归纳/演绎编码对访谈进行记录、转录和分析,以提供主题分析。

结果

对 10 名护理人员和 9 名临床医生进行了访谈。护理人员对孩子诊断的严重程度和所需的强化家庭护理感到惊讶,但由于这是唯一的生存机会,他们还是选择了气管切开术。所有人都建议尽早分阶段介绍气管切开术信息。沟通不畅限制了护理人员对术后护理和出院要求的理解。所有人都认为指南可以规范沟通。

结论

护理人员希望在 NICU 和家中获得有关气管切开术后期望的详细信息。