• 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

在帮助患者做出与治疗相关的决策时,家庭护理人员认为最重要的是什么:一项全国性调查的结果。

What Is Most Important to Family Caregivers When Helping Patients Make Treatment-Related Decisions: Findings from a National Survey.

作者信息

Bechthold Avery C, Azuero Andres, Puga Frank, Ejem Deborah B, Kent Erin E, Ornstein Katherine A, Ladores Sigrid L, Wilson Christina M, Knoepke Christopher E, Miller-Sonet Ellen, Odom J Nicholas

机构信息

School of Nursing, University of Alabama at Birmingham, Birmingham, AL 35294, USA.

Gillings School of Global Public Health, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, NC 27599, USA.

出版信息

Cancers (Basel). 2023 Sep 29;15(19):4792. doi: 10.3390/cancers15194792.

DOI:10.3390/cancers15194792
PMID:37835486
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC10572058/
Abstract

Prioritizing patient values-who/what matters most-is central to palliative care and critical to treatment decision making. Yet which factors are most important to family caregivers in these decisions remains understudied. Using data from a U.S. national survey of cancer caregivers (N = 1661), we examined differences in factors considered very important by caregivers when partnering with patients in cancer treatment decision making by cancer stage and caregiver sociodemographics. Fifteen factors were rated on a 4-point Likert-scale from 'very unimportant' to 'very important.' Descriptive statistics were used to characterize caregiver factors and tabulate proportions of importance for each. Generalized linear mixed effect modeling was used to examine the importance of factors by cancer stage, and chi-square analyses were performed to determine associations between caregiver sociodemographics and the five most commonly endorsed factors: quality of life (69%), physical well-being (68%), length of life (66%), emotional well-being (63%), and opinions/feelings of oncology team (59%). Significant associations (all 's < 0.05) of small magnitude were found between the most endorsed factors and caregiver age, race, gender, and ethnicity, most especially 'opinions/feelings of the oncology team'. Future work is needed to determine the best timing and approach for eliciting and effectively incorporating caregiver values and preferences into shared treatment decision making.

摘要

将患者价值观(谁/什么最重要)置于优先地位是姑息治疗的核心,也是治疗决策的关键。然而,在这些决策中,哪些因素对家庭照顾者最为重要,仍有待深入研究。利用美国一项针对癌症照顾者的全国性调查数据(N = 1661),我们研究了在癌症治疗决策中,照顾者与患者合作时,根据癌症阶段和照顾者社会人口统计学特征,认为非常重要的因素之间的差异。15个因素按照从“非常不重要”到“非常重要”的4点李克特量表进行评分。描述性统计用于描述照顾者因素,并列出每个因素的重要性比例。广义线性混合效应模型用于研究各因素在不同癌症阶段的重要性,卡方分析用于确定照顾者社会人口统计学特征与五个最常被认可的因素之间的关联:生活质量(69%)、身体健康(68%)、寿命长度(66%)、情绪健康(63%)以及肿瘤团队的意见/感受(59%)。在最常被认可的因素与照顾者年龄、种族、性别和民族之间发现了小幅度的显著关联(所有p值<0.05),尤其是“肿瘤团队的意见/感受”。未来需要开展工作,以确定在共同治疗决策中引出并有效纳入照顾者价值观和偏好的最佳时机和方法。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/72f4/10572058/6461a4d0ec4b/cancers-15-04792-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/72f4/10572058/7b090fec7d98/cancers-15-04792-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/72f4/10572058/6461a4d0ec4b/cancers-15-04792-g002.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/72f4/10572058/7b090fec7d98/cancers-15-04792-g001.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/72f4/10572058/6461a4d0ec4b/cancers-15-04792-g002.jpg

相似文献

1
What Is Most Important to Family Caregivers When Helping Patients Make Treatment-Related Decisions: Findings from a National Survey.在帮助患者做出与治疗相关的决策时,家庭护理人员认为最重要的是什么:一项全国性调查的结果。
Cancers (Basel). 2023 Sep 29;15(19):4792. doi: 10.3390/cancers15194792.
2
Family caregiver roles and challenges in assisting patients with cancer treatment decision-making: Analysis of data from a national survey.家庭照顾者在协助癌症患者治疗决策中的角色和挑战:来自全国性调查数据分析。
Health Expect. 2023 Oct;26(5):1965-1976. doi: 10.1111/hex.13805. Epub 2023 Jul 2.
3
Patient and Family Caregiver Considerations When Selecting Early Breast Cancer Treatment: Implications for Clinical Pathway Development.选择早期乳腺癌治疗时患者和家属的考虑因素:对临床路径开发的启示。
Patient. 2020 Dec;13(6):683-697. doi: 10.1007/s40271-020-00426-7.
4
Caregiver burden among family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer in a palliative context: A mixed-method study.姑息治疗背景下晚期癌症患者家庭照顾者的照顾负担:一项混合方法研究。
J Clin Nurs. 2023 Nov;32(21-22):7751-7764. doi: 10.1111/jocn.16872. Epub 2023 Sep 14.
5
How do Patients With Advanced Cancer and Family Caregivers Accommodate One Another in Decision-Making? Findings From a Qualitative Study in Specialist Palliative Care.晚期癌症患者及其家庭照顾者在决策过程中如何相互适应?一项专科姑息治疗定性研究的结果
Am J Hosp Palliat Care. 2025 May;42(5):452-458. doi: 10.1177/10499091241255117. Epub 2024 May 16.
6
Bias reported by family caregivers in support received when assisting patients with cancer-related decision-making.癌症相关决策辅助中,家属照顾者在支持性照护方面的报告偏见。
Cancer Med. 2023 Feb;12(3):3567-3576. doi: 10.1002/cam4.5182. Epub 2022 Aug 29.
7
8
Improving Sexual and Gender Minority Cancer Care: Patient and Caregiver Perspectives From a Multi-Methods Pilot Study.改善性少数群体和性别少数群体的癌症护理:一项多方法试点研究中患者和护理人员的观点
Front Oncol. 2022 May 6;12:833195. doi: 10.3389/fonc.2022.833195. eCollection 2022.
9
10
Discordance among patient preferences, caregiver preferences, and caregiver predictions of patient preferences regarding disclosure of terminal status and end-of-life choices.在患者偏好、照护者偏好以及照护者对患者关于终末期状况披露和临终选择偏好的预测之间存在不一致。
Psychooncology. 2015 Feb;24(2):212-9. doi: 10.1002/pon.3631. Epub 2014 Aug 7.

引用本文的文献

1
How Do Patients and Caregivers in Advanced Illness Support One Another in Decision-Making for Patient Care? A Qualitative Interview Study of Patient and Caregiver Dyads in Specialist Palliative Care.晚期疾病患者及其照料者如何在患者护理决策中相互支持?一项针对专科姑息治疗中患者与照料者二元组的定性访谈研究。
Palliat Med Rep. 2024 Sep 30;5(1):417-424. doi: 10.1089/pmr.2024.0047. eCollection 2024.

本文引用的文献

1
How Values Are Discussed, Reflected Upon, and Acted On by Patients and Family Caregivers in the Context of Heart Failure: A Scoping Review.患者和家庭照顾者在心力衰竭背景下讨论、反思和践行价值观的方法:范围综述。
Med Decis Making. 2023 May;43(4):508-520. doi: 10.1177/0272989X231165958. Epub 2023 Apr 14.
2
Utilization of inpatient palliative care services among adolescents and young adults with cancer: Evidence from National Inpatient Sample 2016-2019.癌症青少年和青年住院姑息治疗服务的利用情况:来自2016 - 2019年全国住院患者样本的证据
Palliat Support Care. 2024 Oct;22(5):1027-1034. doi: 10.1017/S1478951523000354.
3
A prospective cohort study of decision-making role preferences of patients with advanced cancer and their family caregivers.
一项关于晚期癌症患者及其家庭照顾者决策角色偏好的前瞻性队列研究。
Cancer. 2023 May 1;129(9):1443-1452. doi: 10.1002/cncr.34684. Epub 2023 Feb 11.
4
Barriers in Healthcare for Latinx Patients with Limited English Proficiency-a Narrative Review.拉美裔英语水平有限患者的医疗保健障碍:叙事性综述。
J Gen Intern Med. 2023 Apr;38(5):1264-1271. doi: 10.1007/s11606-022-07995-3. Epub 2023 Jan 31.
5
Exploration of shared decision making in oncology within the United States: a scoping review.美国肿瘤学中共享决策制定的探索:范围综述。
Support Care Cancer. 2022 Dec 31;31(1):94. doi: 10.1007/s00520-022-07556-8.
6
Bias reported by family caregivers in support received when assisting patients with cancer-related decision-making.癌症相关决策辅助中,家属照顾者在支持性照护方面的报告偏见。
Cancer Med. 2023 Feb;12(3):3567-3576. doi: 10.1002/cam4.5182. Epub 2022 Aug 29.
7
Values elicitation among adults making health-related decisions: A concept analysis.成人在健康相关决策中的价值观探究:概念分析。
Nurs Forum. 2022 Sep;57(5):885-892. doi: 10.1111/nuf.12730. Epub 2022 Apr 17.
8
Personal Values Across Cultures.跨文化的个人价值观。
Annu Rev Psychol. 2022 Jan 4;73:517-546. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-020821-125100. Epub 2021 Oct 19.
9
Clarifying Values: An Updated and Expanded Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.澄清价值观:一项更新和扩展的系统评价和荟萃分析。
Med Decis Making. 2021 Oct;41(7):801-820. doi: 10.1177/0272989X211037946.
10
Incorporating palliative care into oncology practice: why and how.将姑息治疗纳入肿瘤学实践:为什么及如何。
Clin Adv Hematol Oncol. 2021 Jun;19(6):390-395.