• 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

识别在规范整合过程中难以协调的参照框架差异,以便为有多种问题的人提供护理:荷兰的一项混合方法德尔菲研究

Identifying Differences in Frames of Reference That Are Hard to Reconcile During the Process of Normative Integration to Deliver Care for People with Multiple Problems: A Mixed-Method Delphi Study in the Netherlands.

作者信息

Reinhoudt-den Boer Lieke, Huijsman Robbert, van Wijngaarden Jeroen David Hendrikus

机构信息

Erasmus University, The Netherlands.

Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands.

出版信息

Int J Integr Care. 2024 Apr 4;24(2):2. doi: 10.5334/ijic.7583. eCollection 2024 Apr-Jun.

DOI:10.5334/ijic.7583
PMID:38618043
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11012147/
Abstract

BACKGROUND

Integrated care is enhanced by integration on system, organizational, professional, and clinical levels including functional and normative integration. Many studies have been done on functional integration on these different levels, less studies focus on how normative integration takes place. In this study, we focus on the question: what differences in frames of refence must be addressed to establish consensus on appropriate care for People with Multiple Problems?

METHODS

A mixed-method Delphi study was carried out in which professionals and managers regularly involved in care for people with multiple problems (PWMPs) worked towards consensus on appropriate care delivery through the assessment of 15 vignettes representing real trajectories of PWMPs.

RESULTS

No consensus on appropriate care delivery was reached on any of the 15 vignettes. Five differences in perspective explained the dissensus: 1) an individual versus a systemic perspective on the client; 2) a focus on self-expressed needs of clients or professionally assessed (normative) needs; 3) client-directed or caregiver-directed care; 4) client as victim of circumstances or responsible for circumstances; 5) a focus on barriers or opportunities.

CONCLUSIONS

In general, panelists agreed that care for PWMPs should be integrated. However, the further integrated care was to be operationalized in practice the greater the dissensus between panelists emerged. To understand how these differences in perspectives may be overcome to provide care for PWMPs normative integration needs to be studied during actual processes of care delivery.

摘要

背景

综合护理通过系统、组织、专业和临床层面的整合得到加强,包括功能整合和规范整合。许多研究关注这些不同层面的功能整合,而较少研究聚焦于规范整合是如何发生的。在本研究中,我们关注的问题是:为就针对多重问题患者的适当护理达成共识,必须解决哪些参考框架上的差异?

方法

开展了一项混合方法的德尔菲研究,其中经常参与多重问题患者护理工作的专业人员和管理人员通过评估15个代表多重问题患者真实病程的案例 vignettes,努力就适当的护理提供达成共识。

结果

在15个案例 vignettes 中的任何一个上,都未就适当的护理提供达成共识。五个视角上的差异解释了这种分歧:1)对患者的个体视角与系统视角;2)关注患者自我表达的需求或专业评估的(规范)需求;3)以患者为导向或照顾者为导向的护理;4)将患者视为环境的受害者或对环境负责;5)关注障碍或机会。

结论

总体而言,专家小组成员一致认为对多重问题患者的护理应该是综合的。然而,在实践中进一步实施综合护理时,专家小组成员之间出现的分歧就越大。为了理解如何克服这些视角上的差异以向多重问题患者提供护理,需要在实际护理过程中研究规范整合。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1bcd/11012147/f6a143377c9b/ijic-24-2-7583-g1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1bcd/11012147/f6a143377c9b/ijic-24-2-7583-g1.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/1bcd/11012147/f6a143377c9b/ijic-24-2-7583-g1.jpg

相似文献

1
Identifying Differences in Frames of Reference That Are Hard to Reconcile During the Process of Normative Integration to Deliver Care for People with Multiple Problems: A Mixed-Method Delphi Study in the Netherlands.识别在规范整合过程中难以协调的参照框架差异,以便为有多种问题的人提供护理:荷兰的一项混合方法德尔菲研究
Int J Integr Care. 2024 Apr 4;24(2):2. doi: 10.5334/ijic.7583. eCollection 2024 Apr-Jun.
2
Towards a values framework for integrated health services: an international Delphi study.迈向整合卫生服务的价值观框架:一项国际德尔菲研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Mar 18;20(1):224. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-5008-y.
3
Home Care Case Managers' Integrated Care of Older Adults With Multiple Chronic Conditions: A Scoping Review.居家护理个案经理对患有多种慢性病的老年人的综合护理:一项范围综述
Prof Case Manag. 2018 Jul/Aug;23(4):165-189. doi: 10.1097/NCM.0000000000000286.
4
How has the impact of 'care pathway technologies' on service integration in stroke care been measured and what is the strength of the evidence to support their effectiveness in this respect?“护理路径技术”对卒中护理服务整合的影响是如何衡量的,以及有哪些证据支持其在这方面的有效性?
Int J Evid Based Healthc. 2008 Mar;6(1):78-110. doi: 10.1111/j.1744-1609.2007.00098.x.
5
Defining practice variation and exploring influencing factors on needs assessment in home care nursing: A Delphi study.界定家庭护理护理需求评估中的实践差异并探讨其影响因素:一项德尔菲研究。
J Adv Nurs. 2023 Sep;79(9):3426-3439. doi: 10.1111/jan.15680. Epub 2023 Apr 23.
6
The Effectiveness of Integrated Care Pathways for Adults and Children in Health Care Settings: A Systematic Review.综合护理路径在医疗环境中对成人和儿童的有效性:一项系统评价。
JBI Libr Syst Rev. 2009;7(3):80-129. doi: 10.11124/01938924-200907030-00001.
7
How do clients with multiple problems and (in)formal caretakers coproduce integrated care and support? A longitudinal study on integrated care trajectories of clients with multiple problems.患有多种问题的客户和(非正式)护理人员如何共同提供综合护理和支持?患有多种问题的客户的综合护理轨迹的纵向研究。
Health Expect. 2023 Feb;26(1):268-281. doi: 10.1111/hex.13653. Epub 2022 Dec 15.
8
A cognitive perspective on health systems integration: results of a Canadian Delphi study.健康系统整合的认知视角:一项加拿大德尔菲研究的结果
BMC Health Serv Res. 2014 May 19;14:222. doi: 10.1186/1472-6963-14-222.
9
Measuring integrated care.衡量整合式照护。
Dan Med Bull. 2011 Feb;58(2):B4245.
10
The importance of normative integration in stroke services: case study evidence from Sweden and England.中风服务中规范整合的重要性:来自瑞典和英国的案例研究证据。
Health Serv Manage Res. 2012 Nov;25(4):155-61. doi: 10.1177/0951484812474245.

本文引用的文献

1
How Different Quality Paradigms Undermine a Shared Value Base for Integrated Care: The Need for Collective Reflexivity.不同质量范式如何破坏综合护理的共享价值基础:集体反思的必要性。
Int J Integr Care. 2022 Jan 21;22(1):5. doi: 10.5334/ijic.5935. eCollection 2022 Jan-Mar.
2
Integrated care: easy in theory, harder in practice?综合护理:理论上容易,实践中更难?
Intern Emerg Med. 2022 Jan;17(1):3-6. doi: 10.1007/s11739-021-02830-9. Epub 2021 Sep 7.
3
Social Features of Integration in Health Systems and Their Relationship to Provider Experience, Care Quality and Clinical Integration.
卫生系统整合的社会特征及其与提供者体验、护理质量和临床整合的关系。
Med Care Res Rev. 2022 Jun;79(3):359-370. doi: 10.1177/10775587211024796. Epub 2021 Jun 16.
4
'What matters to you?' Normative integration of an intervention to promote participation of older patients with multi-morbidity - a qualitative case study.“对你来说什么重要?”促进患有多种疾病的老年患者参与的干预措施的规范整合——一项定性案例研究。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2021 Feb 4;21(1):117. doi: 10.1186/s12913-021-06106-y.
5
Improving design choices in Delphi studies in medicine: the case of an exemplary physician multi-round panel study with 100% response.改进医学德尔菲研究中的设计选择:以一项具有 100%应答率的示范性医师多轮小组研究为例。
BMC Med Res Methodol. 2020 Jun 15;20(1):156. doi: 10.1186/s12874-020-01029-4.
6
Developing Normative Integration among Professionals in an Intersectoral Collaboration: A Multi-Method Investigation of an Integrated Intervention for People on Sick Leave Due to Common Mental Disorders.在跨部门合作中促进专业人员之间的规范整合:对因常见精神障碍而休病假人员的综合干预措施的多方法调查
Int J Integr Care. 2019 Nov 4;19(4):4. doi: 10.5334/ijic.4694.
7
Sharing a vision. Do participants in integrated care programmes have the same goals and objectives?共享愿景。参与整合照护计划的参与者是否有相同的目标?
Health Serv Manage Res. 2020 Aug;33(3):122-129. doi: 10.1177/0951484819871136. Epub 2019 Sep 5.
8
Working on working together. A systematic review on how healthcare professionals contribute to interprofessional collaboration.共同努力。一项关于医疗保健专业人员如何促进专业间合作的系统评价。
J Interprof Care. 2020 May-Jun;34(3):332-342. doi: 10.1080/13561820.2019.1636007. Epub 2019 Jul 22.
9
Project INTEGRATE: Developing a Framework to Guide Design, Implementation and Evaluation of People-centred Integrated Care Processes.整合项目:构建一个指导以患者为中心的综合护理流程设计、实施与评估的框架
Int J Integr Care. 2019 Feb 1;19(1):3. doi: 10.5334/ijic.4178.
10
Values of Integrated Care: A Systematic Review.综合护理的价值:一项系统综述
Int J Integr Care. 2018 Nov 15;18(4):9. doi: 10.5334/ijic.4172.