Measuring intensity of end of life care: a systematic review.
Measuring intensity of end of life care: a systematic review.
复制标题
DOI：
10.1371/journal.pone.0123764
复制
发表时间：
2015
期刊：
影响因子：
3.7
通讯作者：
Clough-Gorr KM
中科院分区：
文献类型：
--
作者：
Luta X;Maessen M;Egger M;Stuck AE;Goodman D;Clough-Gorr KM
许多研究都衡量了临终关怀的强度。然而，目前还没有关于实地使用的措施的摘要。总结用于评估临终关怀强度的测量方法的特点、使用特点和报告的有效性。根据PRISMA指南，这是一次系统的审查。我们在Ovid Medline、Embase、Cochrane图书馆的系统综述和参考文献列表中进行了全面的文献搜索，这些文献是在1990-2014年间出版的。两名审查员独立筛选标题、摘要、全文和摘录数据。如果研究使用了临终关怀强度的衡量标准，那么这些研究就符合条件。临终关怀强度的定义是描述生命最后一年实施的医疗护理的类型和强度的所有可量化指标。在1590项可能符合条件的研究中，共有58项符合我们的纳入标准并被纳入。最常见的报告措施是住院(n=44)、重症监护病房入院(n=39)和化疗使用(n=27)。研究测量了从48小时到12个月的不同时间段的护理强度。大多数研究是在癌症患者(n=31)中进行的。只有4项研究包含了所用措施的有效性信息。没有一篇评价结构效度，3篇研究考虑了标准，1篇研究同时报道了内容效度和标准效度。这篇综述提供了一个综述，以帮助选择基于先前使用的临终关怀措施的强度，但同时强调了在该领域进行更多验证性研究和达成共识的关键需要。
Many studies have measured the intensity of end of life care. However, no summary of the measures used in the field is currently available. To summarise features, characteristics of use and reported validity of measures used for evaluating intensity of end of life care. This was a systematic review according to PRISMA guidelines. We performed a comprehensive literature search in Ovid Medline, Embase, The Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews and reference lists published between 1990-2014. Two reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, full texts and extracted data. Studies were eligible if they used a measure of end of life care intensity, defined as all quantifiable measures describing the type and intensity of medical care administered during the last year of life. A total of 58 of 1590 potentially eligible studies met our inclusion criteria and were included. The most commonly reported measures were hospitalizations (n = 44), intensive care unit admissions (n = 39) and chemotherapy use (n = 27). Studies measured intensity of care in different timeframes ranging from 48 hours to 12 months. The majority of studies were conducted in cancer patients (n = 31). Only 4 studies included information on validation of the measures used. None evaluated construct validity, while 3 studies considered criterion and 1 study reported both content and criterion validity. This review provides a synthesis to aid in choosing intensity of end of life care measures based on their previous use but simultaneously highlights the crucial need for more validation studies and consensus in the field.
登录
查看更多内容
影响因子：
4.4
作者：
Abel, J.;Rich, A.;Purdy, S.
通讯作者：
Purdy, S.
影响因子：
3.4
作者：
Barnato, AE;McClellan, MB;Garber, AM
通讯作者：
Garber, AM
影响因子：
2
作者：
Chan, Kam Wah
通讯作者：
Chan, Kam Wah
影响因子：
6.2
作者：
Bergman, Jonathan;Chi, Amanda C.;Litwin, Mark S.
通讯作者：
Litwin, Mark S.
影响因子：
3.6
作者：
Braga, Sofia;Miranda, Ana;Moreira, Antonio
通讯作者：
Moreira, Antonio