首页> 外文期刊>Palliative medicine >Differences in goals of care discussion outcomes among healthcare professionals: an observational cross-sectional study
【24h】

Differences in goals of care discussion outcomes among healthcare professionals: an observational cross-sectional study

机译:医疗保健专业人员之间护理讨论结果目标的差异:一项观察性横断面研究

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: Goals of care discussions ensure patients receive the care that they want. Recent studies have recognized the opportunity for allied health professionals, such as nurses, in facilitating goals of care discussions. However, the outcomes of such interventions are not well studied. Aim: To compare the outcomes of goals of care discussions led by physicians and nurses. Design: This is a retrospective cohort study of patients admitted to an Internal Medicine unit from January 2018 to August 2019. A comprehensive chart review was performed on a random sample of patients. Patient's decision to accept or refuse cardiopulmonary resuscitation was recorded and analyzed. Analysis was stratified by patients' comorbidity burden and illness severity. Setting/Participants: The study took place at a tertiary care center and included 200 patients. Patients aged > 18 were included. Patients who have had pre-existing goals of care documentation were excluded. Results: About 52 of the goals of care discussions were completed by nurses and 48 by physicians. Patients were more likely to accept cardiopulmonary resuscitation in nurse-led discussions compared to physician-led ones (80.8 vs 61.4, p = 0.003). Multiple regression showed that patients with higher comorbidity burden (OR 0.71, 95 CI: 0.62-0.82), more severe illness (OR 0.89, 95 CI 0.88-0.99), and physician-led goals of care discussions (OR 0.30, 95 CI: 0.15-0.62) were less likely to accept cardiopulmonary resuscitation. Conclusions: There was a significant difference between the outcomes of goals of care discussions led by nurses and physicians. Patients were more likely to accept aggressive resuscitative measures in nurse-led goals of care discussions. Further research efforts are needed to identify the factors contributing to this discrepancy, and to devise ways of improving goals of care discussion delivery.
机译:背景:护理讨论的目标确保患者得到他们想要的护理。最近的研究已经认识到专职医疗专业人员(如护士)在促进护理讨论目标方面的机会。然而,这些干预措施的结果尚未得到充分研究。目的:比较由医生和护士领导的护理讨论目标的结果。设计:这是一项针对 2018 年 1 月至 2019 年 8 月入住内科病房的患者的回顾性队列研究。对随机抽样的患者进行了全面的图表审查。记录并分析患者接受或拒绝心肺复苏的决定。分析按患者的合并症负担和疾病严重程度进行分层。环境/参与者:该研究在三级医疗中心进行,包括 200 名患者。纳入>18岁的患者。已预先存在护理文档目标的患者被排除在外。结果:大约 52% 的护理讨论目标由护士完成,48% 由医生完成。与医生主导的讨论相比,患者在护士主导的讨论中更有可能接受心肺复苏(80.8% vs 61.4%,p = 0.003)。多元回归显示,合并症负担较高(OR 0.71,95% CI:0.62-0.82)、病情较重(OR 0.89,95% CI 0.88-0.99)和医生主导的护理讨论目标(OR 0.30,95% CI:0.15-0.62)的患者接受心肺复苏的可能性较小。结论:由护士和医生主导的护理讨论目标的结果之间存在显着差异。在护士主导的护理讨论目标中,患者更有可能接受积极的复苏措施。需要进一步的研究工作来确定导致这种差异的因素,并设计改进护理讨论提供目标的方法。

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