首页> 外文期刊>Journal of pain and symptom management. >A Scoping Review to Map Empirical Evidence Regarding Key Domains and Questions in the Clinical Pathway of Delirium in Palliative Care
【24h】

A Scoping Review to Map Empirical Evidence Regarding Key Domains and Questions in the Clinical Pathway of Delirium in Palliative Care

机译:关于姑息治疗中Deli妄临床途径中关键领域和问题的经验证据的范围界定的综述

获取原文
       

摘要

Context Based on the clinical care pathway of delirium in palliative care (PC), a published analytic framework (AF) formulated research questions in key domains and recommended a scoping review to identify evidence gaps. Objectives To produce a literature map for key domains of the published AF: screening, prognosis and diagnosis, management, and the health-related outcomes. Methods A standard scoping review framework was used by an interdisciplinary study team of nurse- and physician-delirium researchers, an information specialist, and review methodologists to conduct the review. Knowledge user engagement provided context in refining 19 AF questions. A peer-reviewed search strategy identified citations in Medline, PsycINFO, Embase, and CINAHL databases between 1980 and 2018. Two reviewers independently screened records for inclusion using explicit study eligibility criteria for the population, design, delirium diagnosis, and investigational intent. Results Of 104 studies reporting empirical data and meeting eligibility criteria, most were conducted in patients with cancer (73.1%) and in inpatient PC units (52%). The most frequent study design was a one or more group, nonrandomized trial or cohort (67.3%). Evidence gaps were identified: delirium risk prediction; comparative effectiveness and harms of prevention, variability in delirium management across PC settings, advanced directive and substitute decision-maker input, and transition of care location; and estimating delirium reversibility. Future rigorous primary studies are required to address these gaps and preliminary concerns regarding the quality of extant literature. Conclusion Substantial evidence gaps exist, providing opportunities for future research regarding the assessment, prognosis, and management of delirium in PC settings.
机译:背景on妄在姑息治疗(PC)中的临床护理途径为基础,已发布的分析框架(AF)在关键领域提出了研究问题,并建议进行范围界定研究以鉴定证据差距。目的为已发表的房颤的关键领域制作文献图:筛查,预后和诊断,治疗以及与健康相关的结果。方法护士和医师-妄研究人员,信息专家和审查方法学家的跨学科研究小组使用标准的范围界定审查框架进行审查。知识用户的参与为完善19个AF问题提供了背景。一项经过同行评审的搜索策略在1980年至2018年之间确定了Medline,PsycINFO,Embase和CINAHL数据库中的引文。两名审稿人使用针对人群,设计,del妄诊断和研究意图的明确研究资格标准独立筛选了纳入记录。结果在104项报告中有经验数据并符合入选标准的研究中,大多数是在癌症患者(73.1%)和住院PC机(52%)中进行的。最频繁的研究设计是一个或多个组,非随机试验或队列(67.3%)。确定了证据差距:del妄风险预测;预防的相对有效性和危害性,跨个人电脑设置的del妄管理差异,高级指示和替代决策者的输入以及护理地点的转换;并估计del妄的可逆性。需要进一步的严格的基础研究来解决这些空白和关于现有文献质量的初步关注。结论存在大量的证据空白,为将来有关PC装置中settings妄的评估,预后和管理提供了机会。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号