首页> 外文期刊>Journal of the American Medical Directors Association >Non-diagnosis decisions and non-treatment decisions in elderly patients with cardiovascular diseases, do they differ?--A systematic review.
【24h】

Non-diagnosis decisions and non-treatment decisions in elderly patients with cardiovascular diseases, do they differ?--A systematic review.

机译:老年心血管疾病患者的非诊断决定和非治疗决定是否有所不同?-系统评价。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
获取外文期刊封面目录资料

摘要

The growth in the number of possible medical interventions in the past decennia necessitates physicians to consider whether to use them. Contrary to decisions to withhold treatment, little is known about "non-diagnosis decisions" (NDD) although their consequences seem to be more uncertain. Hence, we hypothesized that "determinants" and "reasons" for NDD are different from those that are associated with non-treatment decisions (NTD). We performed a systematic review on research on physicians' decisions to withhold or withdraw diagnostic or therapeutic interventions. A total of 11,773 unique citations published either in Medline, Embase, or the Cochrane databases were screened, of which 45 articles,--including 4 articles describing NDD in elderly patients suspected of cardiovascular diseases, were considered relevant and analysed in detail. "Determinants" and "reasons" for NDD and NTD were extracted, categorized into predefined categories, and compared with each other. Besides several similarities, we found various differences between NDD and NTD. The proportionality of an intervention (ie, the risk or burden of an intervention opposed to that of no intervention) was associated with NTD but not with NDD. Physician and care institution related characteristics, such as age of the physician or the employment of physician extenders, were more frequently associated with NDD than with NTD. Furthermore, the presence of non-resuscitate directives was correlated with NDD but not with NTD. This systematic review shows that there is little information on NDD in the current literature. Yet, there is not enough evidence to conclude whether NDD can be seen as a separate entity distinct from NTD. More research focusing on NDD seems needed.
机译:在过去的十年中,可能的医疗干预措施数量的增加使医生不得不考虑是否使用这些措施。与拒绝治疗的决定相反,对“非诊断决定”(NDD)知之甚少,尽管其后果似乎更加不确定。因此,我们假设NDD的“决定因素”和“原因”不同于与非治疗决定(NTD)相关的决定因素和原因。我们对医师决定保留或撤回诊断或治疗干预措施的研究进行了系统的审查。总共筛选了在Medline,Embase或Cochrane数据库中发布的11,773个独特引文,其中45篇文章(包括4篇描述疑似心血管疾病的老年患者中NDD的文章)被认为是相关的并进行了详细分析。提取NDD和NTD的“行列式”和“原因”,将其分类为预定义的类别,并进行相互比较。除了几个相似之处,我们还发现了NDD和NTD之间的各种差异。干预的比例性(即,干预的风险或负担与没有干预的风险或负担相反)与NTD相关,而与NDD不相关。与医师和护理机构相关的特征(例如医师的年龄或雇佣医师的扩展员)与NDD的关联比与NTD关联的更为频繁。此外,非复苏指令的存在与NDD相关,而不与NTD相关。这份系统的综述表明,在当前文献中关于NDD的信息很少。但是,没有足够的证据来推断NDD是否可以被视为不同于NTD的独立实体。似乎需要对NDD进行更多研究。

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