Patient-reported outcomes in end-of-life research in pediatric oncology

Patient-reported outcomes in end-of-life research in pediatric oncology
复制标题

DOI:
10.1093/jpepsy/jsm004
复制
发表时间:
2007-10-01
影响因子:
3.6
通讯作者:
Kane, Javier R.
Kane, Javier R.
中科院分区:
心理学3区
文献类型:
--
作者:
Hinds, Pamela S.;Brandon, Jennifer;Kane, Javier R.

文献摘要

被引文献

相似文献

目的通过对已发表的文献进行回顾,确定基于经验的论文的数量和重点,这些论文包括用于直接征求儿科肿瘤患者在生命结束时的患者报告结果(PRO)的研究方法。方法使用关键术语,包括儿科或儿童和肿瘤学或癌症和生命结束或姑息治疗或临终关怀或死亡,并使用5个数据库(PubMed、奥维德、科克伦、PsycInfo PsycArticles和CINAHL),适用于2001年1月至2006年6月期间发表的英语文献。所有检索到的文件进行了独立的审查,由一个小组的六名(护士,医生,和一名心理学家)的背景,在儿科oncology.Results三十五出版物被确定,但九(25.7)被淘汰的分析,因为他们不符合纳入标准。在其余26项中,4项(15.4)包括患者报告的结局,6项(23.1)包括仅由父母报告的结局,5项(19.2)包括仅由工作人员报告的结局。9例(34.6)为回顾性病历审查。两个(7.7)包括父母和记录审查数据或父母和医生reports.Conclusions经验为基础的结束生命的出版物在儿科肿瘤学的数量相对较少,近85个已完成的研究不包括PRO。
Objective The purpose of this review of published literature was to identify the number and focus of empirically based papers that included research methods used to directly solicit patient-reported outcomes (PRO) from pediatric oncology patients at end of life.Methods Key terms including pediatric or child and oncology or cancer and end of life or palliative or hospice or dying were used with five data bases (PubMed, Ovid, Cochrane, PsycInfo PsycArticles, and CINAHL) for English language literature published between January, 2001 and June, 2006. All retrieved documents were independently reviewed by a panel of six (nurses, physicians, and one psychologist) with backgrounds in pediatric oncology.Results Thirty-five publications were identified but nine (25.7) were eliminated from the analysis as they did not meet inclusion criteria. Of the remaining 26, four (15.4) included patient-reported outcomes, six (23.1) included parent only-reported outcomes, and five (19.2) included staff only-reported outcomes. Nine (34.6) were retrospective medical record reviews. Two (7.7) included parent and record review data or parent and physician reports.Conclusions Empirically-based end-of-life publications in pediatric oncology are relatively few in number and nearly 85 of completed studies do not include PRO.