• 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
Coaches Activating, Reaching, and Engaging Patients to Engage in Advance Care Planning: A Randomized Clinical Trial.教练促使、接触并引导患者参与预先护理计划:一项随机临床试验。
JAMA Oncol. 2024 Jul 1;10(7):949-953. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.1242.
2
An Intervention to Increase Advance Care Planning Among Older Adults With Advanced Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.一项提高晚期癌症老年患者预先护理计划的干预措施:一项随机临床试验。
JAMA Netw Open. 2025 May 1;8(5):e259150. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.9150.
3
Effect of the PREPARE Website vs an Easy-to-Read Advance Directive on Advance Care Planning Documentation and Engagement Among Veterans: A Randomized Clinical Trial.PREPARE网站与易读的预立医疗指示对退伍军人预立医疗照护计划文件记录及参与度的影响:一项随机临床试验。
JAMA Intern Med. 2017 Aug 1;177(8):1102-1109. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2017.1607.
4
Effectiveness of a Nurse-Led Multidisciplinary Intervention vs Usual Care on Advance Care Planning for Vulnerable Older Adults in an Accountable Care Organization: A Randomized Clinical Trial.护士主导的多学科干预与常规护理对问责制医疗组织中脆弱老年人的预先护理计划的效果:一项随机临床试验。
JAMA Intern Med. 2021 Mar 1;181(3):361-369. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.5950.
5
Effectiveness of Advance Care Planning Group Visits Among Older Adults in Primary Care.在初级保健中老年患者中,预先医疗照护计划团体访视的效果。
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2020 Oct;68(10):2382-2389. doi: 10.1111/jgs.16694. Epub 2020 Jul 29.
6
Effect of a Community Health Worker Intervention on Acute Care Use, Advance Care Planning, and Patient-Reported Outcomes Among Adults With Advanced Stages of Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.社区卫生工作者干预对晚期癌症患者急性护理使用、预先护理计划和患者报告结果的影响:一项随机临床试验。
JAMA Oncol. 2022 Aug 1;8(8):1139-1148. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2022.1997.
7
Advance Care Planning Video Intervention Among Long-Stay Nursing Home Residents: A Pragmatic Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial.长期居住在养老院的居民的预先医疗指示视频干预:一项实用的群组随机临床试验。
JAMA Intern Med. 2020 Aug 1;180(8):1070-1078. doi: 10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.2366.
8
Empowering Older Adults to Discuss Advance Care Planning During Clinical Visits: The PREPARE Randomized Trial.赋权老年人在临床就诊期间讨论预立医疗照护计划:PREPARE 随机试验。
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2020 Jun;68(6):1210-1217. doi: 10.1111/jgs.16405. Epub 2020 Mar 10.
9
Association of an Advance Care Planning Video and Communication Intervention With Documentation of Advance Care Planning Among Older Adults: A Nonrandomized Controlled Trial.一项关于预立医疗照护计划视频和沟通干预措施与老年患者预立医疗照护计划记录之间关联的非随机对照试验。
JAMA Netw Open. 2022 Feb 1;5(2):e220354. doi: 10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2022.0354.
10
Long-Term Engagement of Patients With Advanced Cancer: Results From the EPAC Randomized Clinical Trial.晚期癌症患者的长期参与:EPAC随机临床试验的结果
JAMA Oncol. 2024 Jul 1;10(7):905-911. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.1221.

引用本文的文献

1
Using nudges with electronic health records systems to improve advance care planning: a systematic review.利用电子健康记录系统的助推手段改善预立医疗计划:一项系统综述
BMC Palliat Care. 2025 Jul 1;24(1):180. doi: 10.1186/s12904-025-01820-4.
2
Facilitated Versus Patient-Directed Advance Care Planning Among Patients With Advanced Cancer: A Randomized Clinical Trial.晚期癌症患者中促进式与患者主导的预先护理计划:一项随机临床试验
JCO Oncol Pract. 2025 Mar 19:OP2500046. doi: 10.1200/OP-25-00046.

教练促使、接触并引导患者参与预先护理计划:一项随机临床试验。

Coaches Activating, Reaching, and Engaging Patients to Engage in Advance Care Planning: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

作者信息

Rodriguez Gladys M, Parikh Divya A, Kapphahn Kris, Gupta Divya M, Fan Alice C, Shah Sumit, Srinivas Sandy, Teuteberg Winifred, Seevaratnam Briththa, Asuncion Khay, Chien Joanne, Moore Kaidi, Ruiz Shann Mika, Patel Manali I

机构信息

Department of Medicine, Feinberg School of Medicine at Northwestern University, Chicago, Illinois.

Department of Medicine, Stanford University, Stanford, California.

出版信息

JAMA Oncol. 2024 Jul 1;10(7):949-953. doi: 10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.1242.

DOI:10.1001/jamaoncol.2024.1242
PMID:38780960
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11117149/
Abstract

IMPORTANCE

Advance care planning (ACP) remains low among patients with advanced cancer. Multilevel interventions compared with clinician-level interventions may be more effective in improving ACP.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate whether a multilevel intervention could improve clinician-documented ACP compared with a clinician-level intervention alone.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: This randomized clinical trial, performed from September 12, 2019, through May 12, 2021, included adults with advanced genitourinary cancers at an academic, tertiary hospital. Data analysis was performed by intention to treat from May 1 to August 10, 2023.

INTERVENTION

Participants were randomized 1:1 to a 6-month patient-level lay health worker structured ACP education along with a clinician-level intervention composed of 3-hour ACP training and integration of a structured electronic health record documentation template (intervention group) or to the clinician-level intervention alone (control group).

MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES

The primary outcome was ACP documentation in the electronic health record by the oncology clinician within 12 months after randomization. Secondary, exploratory outcomes included shared decision-making, palliative care use, hospice use, emergency department visits, and hospitalizations within 12 months after randomization.

RESULTS

Among 402 participants enrolled in the study, median age was 71 years (range, 21-102 years); 361 (89.8%) identified as male. More intervention group participants had oncology clinician-documented ACP than control group participants (82 [37.8%] vs 40 [21.6%]; odds ratio [OR], 2.29; 95% CI, 1.44-3.64). At 12-month follow-up, more intervention than control group participants had palliative care (72 [33.2%] vs 25 [13.5%]; OR, 3.18; 95% CI, 1.91-5.28) and hospice use (49 [22.6%] vs 19 [10.3%]; OR, 2.54; 95% CI, 1.44-4.51). There were no differences in the proportion of participants between groups with an emergency department visit (65 [30.0%] vs 61 [33.0%]; OR, 0.87; 95% CI, 0.57-1.33) or hospitalization (89 [41.0%] vs 85 [46.0%]; OR, 0.82; 95% CI, 0.55-1.22). Intervention group participants had fewer hospitalizations than control group participants (mean [SD] number of hospitalizations per year, 0.87 [1.60] vs 1.04 [1.77]) and a lower risk of hospitalization (incidence rate ratio, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.65-0.98).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

In this randomized clinical trial, a multilevel intervention improved oncology clinician-documented ACP compared with a clinician-level intervention alone for patients with genitourinary cancer. The intervention is one approach to effectively increase ACP among patients with cancer.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03856463.

摘要

重要性

晚期癌症患者的预先护理计划(ACP)水平仍然较低。与临床医生层面的干预措施相比,多层次干预措施可能在改善ACP方面更有效。

目的

评估与仅采用临床医生层面的干预措施相比,多层次干预措施是否能改善临床医生记录的ACP。

设计、地点和参与者:这项随机临床试验于2019年9月12日至2021年5月12日进行,纳入了一家学术性三级医院的晚期泌尿生殖系统癌症成年患者。数据分析于2023年5月1日至8月10日按意向性分析进行。

干预措施

参与者按1:1随机分为接受为期6个月的患者层面的非专业健康工作者结构化ACP教育以及由3小时的ACP培训和结构化电子健康记录文档模板整合组成的临床医生层面的干预措施(干预组),或仅接受临床医生层面的干预措施(对照组)。

主要结局和测量指标

主要结局是随机分组后12个月内肿瘤临床医生在电子健康记录中记录的ACP。次要的探索性结局包括共同决策、姑息治疗使用情况、临终关怀使用情况、急诊就诊次数以及随机分组后12个月内的住院情况。

结果

在纳入研究的402名参与者中,中位年龄为71岁(范围为21 - 102岁);361名(89.8%)为男性。干预组中肿瘤临床医生记录有ACP的参与者比对照组更多(82名[37.8%]对40名[21.6%];优势比[OR]为2.29;95%置信区间[CI]为1.44 - 3.64)。在12个月的随访中,接受干预的参与者比对照组更多地接受了姑息治疗(72名[33.2%]对25名[13.5%];OR为3.18;95% CI为1.91 - 5.28)和临终关怀(49名[22.6%]对19名[10.3%];OR为2.54;95% CI为1.44 - 4.51)。两组之间急诊就诊的参与者比例(65名[30.0%]对61名[33.0%];OR为0.87;95% CI为0.57 - 1.33)或住院的参与者比例(89名[41.0%]对85名[46.0%];OR为0.82;95% CI为0.55 - 1.22)没有差异。干预组参与者的住院次数少于对照组参与者(每年住院次数的均值[标准差],0.87[1.60]对1.04[1.77]),且住院风险较低(发病率比为0.80;95% CI为0.65 - 0.98)。

结论和相关性

在这项随机临床试验中,与仅针对泌尿生殖系统癌症患者的临床医生层面的干预措施相比,多层次干预措施改善了肿瘤临床医生记录的ACP。该干预措施是有效提高癌症患者ACP的一种方法。

试验注册

ClinicalTrials.gov标识符:NCT03856463。