End-of-life care for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a scoping review protocol.

IF 6.3 4区医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL

Systematic Reviews Pub Date : 2024-11-28 DOI:10.1186/s13643-024-02712-z

Kotoko Minami, Chihiro Unozawa, Arina Matsunaga, Tomoko Kamei

{"title":"End-of-life care for people with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: a scoping review protocol.","authors":"Kotoko Minami, Chihiro Unozawa, Arina Matsunaga, Tomoko Kamei","doi":"10.1186/s13643-024-02712-z","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive inflammatory disease that has a typical illness trajectory. Awareness of unique disease courses as well as providing end-of-life care (EOLC) for COPD patients is important as most patients experience varied degrees of suffering toward the end-of-life. The purpose of this scoping review is to map out key concepts, main sources, and types of evidence available in the area of research on EOLC with multiple interventions for people with COPD.Methods: This scoping review will be conducted following the latest Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidelines. In addition, this review process will adhere to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). The initial simple search concepts will be set out as \"chronic obstructive pulmonary disease\" and \"end-of-life care\". Based on the eligibility criteria, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, CINAHL Ultimate, Embase, and Google Scholar databases will be searched, and all quantitative and qualitative studies of the after-year publication of each electronic database will be included. This process of literature selection will be carried out independently by each researcher. The results will be summarised in a narrative synthesis approach and the gaps and potential biases of the evidence identified by comparing the adopted articles for EOLC with multiple interventions for people with COPD.Discussion: This scoping review will outline in detail the evidence and the gaps from primary studies that have been gathered from the qualitative and quantitative literature based on all eligibility criteria. Therefore, the results of this review will contribute to a new field of systematic reviews. Furthermore, providing an outline of an EOLC for COPD in this study may improve the practice of healthcare professionals in this area. Ethical approval and consent are not required as no human participants were involved in this study.Systematic review registration: This research has been registered in the Open Science Framework (OSF) ( https://osf.io/upd4a ).","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"13 1","pages":"294"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11603901/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02712-z","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) is a progressive inflammatory disease that has a typical illness trajectory. Awareness of unique disease courses as well as providing end-of-life care (EOLC) for COPD patients is important as most patients experience varied degrees of suffering toward the end-of-life. The purpose of this scoping review is to map out key concepts, main sources, and types of evidence available in the area of research on EOLC with multiple interventions for people with COPD.

Methods: This scoping review will be conducted following the latest Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) guidelines. In addition, this review process will adhere to the preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analysis extension for scoping reviews (PRISMA-ScR). The initial simple search concepts will be set out as "chronic obstructive pulmonary disease" and "end-of-life care". Based on the eligibility criteria, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), PubMed, CINAHL Ultimate, Embase, and Google Scholar databases will be searched, and all quantitative and qualitative studies of the after-year publication of each electronic database will be included. This process of literature selection will be carried out independently by each researcher. The results will be summarised in a narrative synthesis approach and the gaps and potential biases of the evidence identified by comparing the adopted articles for EOLC with multiple interventions for people with COPD.

Discussion: This scoping review will outline in detail the evidence and the gaps from primary studies that have been gathered from the qualitative and quantitative literature based on all eligibility criteria. Therefore, the results of this review will contribute to a new field of systematic reviews. Furthermore, providing an outline of an EOLC for COPD in this study may improve the practice of healthcare professionals in this area. Ethical approval and consent are not required as no human participants were involved in this study.

Systematic review registration: This research has been registered in the Open Science Framework (OSF) ( https://osf.io/upd4a ).

查看原文本刊更多论文

慢性阻塞性肺疾病患者的临终关怀：范围审查方案

背景：慢性阻塞性肺疾病（COPD）是一种进行性炎症性疾病，具有典型的发病轨迹。意识到独特的疾病过程以及为COPD患者提供临终关怀（EOLC）是很重要的，因为大多数患者在临终时会经历不同程度的痛苦。本综述的目的是明确COPD患者EOLC联合多种干预研究领域的关键概念、主要来源和现有证据类型。方法：根据最新的乔安娜布里格斯研究所（JBI）指南进行范围审查。此外，该审查过程将坚持系统审查和范围审查的元分析扩展的首选报告项目（PRISMA-ScR）。最初的简单搜索概念将设定为“慢性阻塞性肺病”和“临终关怀”。根据入选标准，检索Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials （Central）、PubMed、CINAHL Ultimate、Embase和谷歌Scholar数据库，并纳入各电子数据库年度出版物的所有定量和定性研究。这一文献选择过程将由每位研究者独立进行。结果将以叙事综合方法进行总结，并通过比较EOLC与COPD患者多重干预措施所采用的文章来确定证据的差距和潜在偏差。讨论：此范围审查将详细概述从定性和定量文献中收集的基于所有资格标准的初步研究的证据和差距。因此，本综述的结果将有助于开辟系统评价的新领域。此外，在本研究中提供COPD的EOLC大纲可能会改善该领域医疗保健专业人员的实践。由于本研究不涉及人类参与者，因此不需要伦理批准和同意。系统评价注册：本研究已在开放科学框架（OSF）（https://osf.io/upd4a）中注册。

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

Systematic Reviews Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)

CiteScore

8.30

自引率

0.00%

发文量

241

审稿时长

11 weeks

期刊介绍： Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.