Patients experience regarding home mechanical ventilation in an outpatient setting.

IF 3.5 3区 医学 Q2 RESPIRATORY SYSTEM
Carla Ribeiro, Cristina Jácome, Pedro Oliveira, Sara Conde, Wolfram Windisch, Rui Nunes
{"title":"Patients experience regarding home mechanical ventilation in an outpatient setting.","authors":"Carla Ribeiro,&nbsp;Cristina Jácome,&nbsp;Pedro Oliveira,&nbsp;Sara Conde,&nbsp;Wolfram Windisch,&nbsp;Rui Nunes","doi":"10.1177/14799731221137082","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>The patient's experience of treatment is a cornerstone of high-quality healthcare, along with clinical safety and effectiveness. We aimed to evaluate the patients' perspectives regarding home mechanical ventilation (HMV) follow up in an outpatient setting and ascertain differences between patients that started HMV in the outpatient setting compared to other settings.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>This cross-sectional study was conducted with patients with chronic respiratory failure under HMV in the Outpatient Ventilation Clinic. Patients filled in a patient experience questionnaire and the S3-NIV questionnaire.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The study included 235 patients (127, 54% male), median 70 [25-75 percentiles 64-76] years) and about half were adapted to HMV in the outpatient setting (117, 49.8%). Patients had a daily ventilator usage of 8.0 [6.0-10.0] hours and have been on ventilator for a median of 35.0 [12.0-66.0] months. Patients reported an overall good experience regarding education at initiation (209 [88.9%] considered the information given was enough), short time to adaptation [104 (44.3%) felt adapted after some hours], with perceived benefits (171 [72.8%] reported less shortness of breath, 158 (67.2%) improved quality of life and 150 (63.8%) less tiredness). Benefits overcame the treatment side-effects (158 [67.2%] reported mucosal dryness, 109 (46.4%) mask sores and 96 (40.9%) leaks). There was no difference in terms of reported health gains, side effects or time to adaptation between adaptation settings, but patients starting HMV in the outpatient setting reported better communication and education at adaptation.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Outpatient setting was perceived as a positive experience, both in HMV initiation and follow up, with good patient-physician communication leading to significant health reported gains, improvement of health status and well-being and good treatment adherence.</p>","PeriodicalId":10217,"journal":{"name":"Chronic Respiratory Disease","volume":"19 ","pages":"14799731221137082"},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2022-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://ftp.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pub/pmc/oa_pdf/2f/17/10.1177_14799731221137082.PMC9706049.pdf","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Chronic Respiratory Disease","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/14799731221137082","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"RESPIRATORY SYSTEM","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

Background: The patient's experience of treatment is a cornerstone of high-quality healthcare, along with clinical safety and effectiveness. We aimed to evaluate the patients' perspectives regarding home mechanical ventilation (HMV) follow up in an outpatient setting and ascertain differences between patients that started HMV in the outpatient setting compared to other settings.

Methods: This cross-sectional study was conducted with patients with chronic respiratory failure under HMV in the Outpatient Ventilation Clinic. Patients filled in a patient experience questionnaire and the S3-NIV questionnaire.

Results: The study included 235 patients (127, 54% male), median 70 [25-75 percentiles 64-76] years) and about half were adapted to HMV in the outpatient setting (117, 49.8%). Patients had a daily ventilator usage of 8.0 [6.0-10.0] hours and have been on ventilator for a median of 35.0 [12.0-66.0] months. Patients reported an overall good experience regarding education at initiation (209 [88.9%] considered the information given was enough), short time to adaptation [104 (44.3%) felt adapted after some hours], with perceived benefits (171 [72.8%] reported less shortness of breath, 158 (67.2%) improved quality of life and 150 (63.8%) less tiredness). Benefits overcame the treatment side-effects (158 [67.2%] reported mucosal dryness, 109 (46.4%) mask sores and 96 (40.9%) leaks). There was no difference in terms of reported health gains, side effects or time to adaptation between adaptation settings, but patients starting HMV in the outpatient setting reported better communication and education at adaptation.

Conclusions: Outpatient setting was perceived as a positive experience, both in HMV initiation and follow up, with good patient-physician communication leading to significant health reported gains, improvement of health status and well-being and good treatment adherence.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

病人的经验,关于家庭机械通气在门诊设置。
背景:患者的治疗经历是高质量医疗保健的基石,同时也是临床安全性和有效性的基石。我们的目的是评估患者对门诊家庭机械通气(HMV)随访的看法,并确定在门诊与其他情况下开始HMV的患者之间的差异。方法:采用横断面研究方法对门诊通气门诊HMV下慢性呼吸衰竭患者进行研究。患者填写患者体验问卷和S3-NIV问卷。结果:该研究纳入235例患者(127例,54%为男性),中位年龄为70岁(25-75百分位数64-76),约一半患者在门诊适应HMV(117例,49.8%)。患者每天使用呼吸机8.0[6.0-10.0]小时,使用呼吸机的中位数为35.0[12.0-66.0]个月。患者报告在开始时的总体教育体验良好(209例[88.9%]认为给予的信息足够),适应时间短[104例(44.3%)在几个小时后感到适应],感知到益处(171例[72.8%]报告呼吸短促,158例(67.2%)改善生活质量,150例(63.8%)减少疲劳)。益处克服了治疗的副作用(158例(67.2%)报告粘膜干燥,109例(46.4%)报告面膜溃疡,96例(40.9%)报告渗漏)。在报告的健康收益、副作用或适应时间方面,在适应环境之间没有差异,但在门诊环境中开始HMV的患者报告了更好的适应沟通和教育。结论:在HMV开始和随访中,门诊环境被认为是一种积极的体验,良好的医患沟通导致显着的健康报告收益,健康状况和幸福感的改善以及良好的治疗依从性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Chronic Respiratory Disease
Chronic Respiratory Disease RESPIRATORY SYSTEM-
CiteScore
5.90
自引率
7.30%
发文量
47
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Chronic Respiratory Disease is a peer-reviewed, open access, scholarly journal, created in response to the rising incidence of chronic respiratory diseases worldwide. It publishes high quality research papers and original articles that have immediate relevance to clinical practice and its multi-disciplinary perspective reflects the nature of modern treatment. The journal provides a high quality, multi-disciplinary focus for the publication of original papers, reviews and commentary in the broad area of chronic respiratory disease, particularly its treatment and management.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信