首页> 外文期刊>Palliative medicine >Complementary therapy in palliative care: A synthesis of qualitative and quantitative systematic reviews
【24h】

Complementary therapy in palliative care: A synthesis of qualitative and quantitative systematic reviews

机译:姑息治疗的互补疗法:定性和定量系统评论的合成

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

Background: Interventions delivered in palliative care are complex and their evaluation through qualitative and quantitative research can lead to contrasting results. In a systematic review of trials, the effectiveness results of complementary therapies in palliative care were inconclusive; however, our qualitative synthesis showed participants perceived them to be beneficial. Aim: Use a novel methodology to synthesise evidence from qualitative and quantitative systematic reviews on complementary therapy in palliative care to explore the following: (1) If interventions delivered in trials reflect how participants in qualitative studies report they are delivered in real-life settings and (2) whether quality of life measures used in trials capture perceived benefits that are reported in qualitative studies. Methods: Two matrix tables were formulated. In one, key components in delivery of the complementary therapy from the qualitative synthesis which are as follows: (1) relationship with therapist, (2) comfortable environment, (3) choices (e.g. area of massage) and (4) frequent sessions, were plotted against intervention description, to explore matches and mismatches. In the other, items included in quality of life scales were compared with perceived benefits of complementary therapy. Results: None of the trials included all four key delivery components. The five quality of life scales used in the trials failed to capture the range of perceived benefits from the complementary therapies and many included inappropriate or redundant items. Conclusions: By integrating qualitative and quantitative review data, we determined the reasons trials may be inconclusive. This methodological exemplar provides a framework for understanding complexity in outcomes across trials and a direction for future research.
机译:背景:在姑息治疗中实施的干预措施是复杂的,通过定性和定量研究对其进行评估可以得出对比的结果。在对试验的系统回顾中,姑息治疗中补充疗法的有效性结果没有定论;然而,我们的定性综合表明,参与者认为它们是有益的。目的:使用一种新的方法,综合姑息治疗中补充疗法的定性和定量系统评价的证据,以探索以下方面:(1)试验中提供的干预措施是否反映了定性研究参与者如何报告他们在现实生活中提供的情况;(2)试验中使用的生活质量指标是否捕捉到了预期的益处在定性研究中有报道。方法:制定两个矩阵表。在其中一个案例中,根据干预描述,绘制了从定性综合中提供补充治疗的关键组成部分,这些组成部分如下:(1)与治疗师的关系,(2)舒适的环境,(3)选择(例如按摩区域)和(4)频繁的疗程,以探索匹配和不匹配。在另一项研究中,生活质量量表中的项目与补充治疗的感知益处进行了比较。结果:没有一项试验包括所有四个关键的分娩成分。试验中使用的五个生活质量量表未能捕捉到补充疗法的感知益处范围,其中许多包括不适当或多余的项目。结论:通过整合定性和定量审查数据,我们确定了试验可能不确定的原因。这一方法学范例为理解整个试验结果的复杂性提供了一个框架,并为未来的研究指明了方向。

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