首页> 外文期刊>Archives of Internal Medicine >Dealing with delicate issues in continuous deep sedation. Varying practices among dutch medical specialists, general practitioners, and nursing home physicians.
【24h】

Dealing with delicate issues in continuous deep sedation. Varying practices among dutch medical specialists, general practitioners, and nursing home physicians.

机译:处理的问题在连续深镇静。专家、全科医生、护理家庭医生。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

BACKGROUND: This article examines delicate issues in continuous deep sedation (CDS) from the perspectives of different types of physicians. The following sensitive issues involved in CDS were investigated: artificial hydration, sedation for nonphysical discomfort, the relationship between CDS and euthanasia, and patient involvement in decision making for CDS. METHODS: A structured retrospective questionnaire concerning the most recent case of CDS during the past 12 months was sent to a sample of medical specialists (n = 727), general practitioners (n = 626), and nursing home physicians (n = 111). RESULTS: Response rates were 26.4% for medical specialists, 37.4% for general practitioners, and 59.5% for nursing home physicians. Indications for CDS differed among the types of physicians. General practitioners (25.0%) were most often confronted with a patient request for euthanasia before starting CDS compared with medical specialists (8.9%) and nursing home physicians (6.5%). A decision to forgo artificial hydration in CDS was more often made by nursing home physicians (91.3%) compared with medical specialists (53.7%) and general practitioners (51.2%). Shorter survival was found for patients sedated for nonphysical discomfort (vs other patients) by general practitioners. Among all patients, 74.5% were involved in decision making before the start of CDS. CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrates notable differences in CDS practice among various types of physicians. To what extent this is related to different patient populations or to different expertise requires further investigation. The use of CDS for nonphysical discomfort calls for critical examination to avoid ambiguous practice.
机译:背景:本文探讨的问题在连续深镇静(CDS)观点不同类型的医生。下面的敏感问题参与cd调查:人工水合作用,镇静吗对于非物质不适,关系cd和安乐死,和病人之间的关系参与决策的cd。一个结构化的回顾性问卷调查关于最近的cd中过去12个月的样本被送往医疗专家(n = 727),全科医生(n =626)和养老院医生(n = 111)。结果:医学回应率是26.4%专家,37.4%为全科医生,养老院医生为59.5%。cd中不同类型的医生。全科医生(25.0%)是最常见的面对一个病人请求安乐死开始前cd与医学专家医生(8.9%)和养老院(6.5%)。在cd经常由养老院医师与医疗相比(91.3%)专家(53.7%)和全科医生(51.2%)。非物质不适镇静(vs由全科医生病人)。患者中,有74.5%的人参与决策开始前的cd。研究表明CDS有着显著的不同实践中各种类型的医生。多大程度上这是与不同的病人群体或不同的专业要求进一步调查。非物质不适要求至关重要检查,以避免模棱两可的实践。

著录项

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