Referral Criteria for Specialist Palliative Care for Patients With Dementia.

IF 10.5 1区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Yuchieh Kathryn Chang, Jennifer Philip, Jenny T van der Steen, Lieve Van den Block, Allyn Yin Mei Hum, Pedro E Pérez-Cruz, Carlos Paiva, Masanori Mori, Ping-Jen Chen, Meera R Agar, Laura Hanson, Catherine J Evans, David Hui
{"title":"Referral Criteria for Specialist Palliative Care for Patients With Dementia.","authors":"Yuchieh Kathryn Chang, Jennifer Philip, Jenny T van der Steen, Lieve Van den Block, Allyn Yin Mei Hum, Pedro E Pérez-Cruz, Carlos Paiva, Masanori Mori, Ping-Jen Chen, Meera R Agar, Laura Hanson, Catherine J Evans, David Hui","doi":"10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.10298","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Importance: </strong>Patients with dementia have considerable supportive care needs. Specialist palliative care may be beneficial, but it is unclear which patients are most appropriate for referral and when they should be referred.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To identify a set of consensus referral criteria for specialist palliative care for patients with dementia.</p><p><strong>Design, setting, and participants: </strong>In this survey study using 3 rounds of Delphi surveys, an international, multidisciplinary panel of clinicians from 5 continents with expertise in the integration of dementia and palliative care were asked to rate 83 putative referral criteria (generated from a previous systematic review and steering committee discussion). Specialist palliative care was defined as an interdisciplinary team consisting of practitioners with advanced knowledge and skills in palliative medicine offering consultative services for specialist-level palliative care in (nonhospice) inpatient, outpatient, community, and home-based settings.</p><p><strong>Main outcomes and measures: </strong>Consensus was defined a priori as at least 70% agreement among experts. A criterion was coded as major if the experts advocated that meeting 1 criterion alone was satisfactory to justify a referral. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Of the 63 invited and eligible panelists, the response rate was 58 (92.1%) in round 1, 58 (92.1%) in round 2, and 60 (95.2%) in round 3. Of the 58 panelists who provided demographic data in round 1, most were aged 40 to 49 years (28 of 58 [48.3%]), and 29 panelists (50%) each were men and women. Panelists achieved consensus on 15 major and 42 minor criteria for specialist palliative care referral. The 15 major criteria were grouped under 5 categories, including dementia type (eg, rapidly progressive dementia), symptom distress (eg, severe physical symptoms), psychosocial factors or decision-making (eg, request for hastened death, assisted suicide, or euthanasia), comorbidities or complications (eg, ≥2 episodes of aspiration pneumonia in the past 12 months); and hospital use (eg, ≥2 hospitalizations within the past 3 months).</p><p><strong>Conclusions and relevance: </strong>In this Delphi survey study, international experts reached consensus on a range of criteria for referral to specialist palliative care. With testing and validation, these criteria may be used to standardize specialist palliative care access for patients with dementia across various care settings.</p>","PeriodicalId":14694,"journal":{"name":"JAMA Network Open","volume":"8 5","pages":"e2510298"},"PeriodicalIF":10.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12079294/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA Network Open","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jamanetworkopen.2025.10298","RegionNum":1,"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

Importance: Patients with dementia have considerable supportive care needs. Specialist palliative care may be beneficial, but it is unclear which patients are most appropriate for referral and when they should be referred.

Objective: To identify a set of consensus referral criteria for specialist palliative care for patients with dementia.

Design, setting, and participants: In this survey study using 3 rounds of Delphi surveys, an international, multidisciplinary panel of clinicians from 5 continents with expertise in the integration of dementia and palliative care were asked to rate 83 putative referral criteria (generated from a previous systematic review and steering committee discussion). Specialist palliative care was defined as an interdisciplinary team consisting of practitioners with advanced knowledge and skills in palliative medicine offering consultative services for specialist-level palliative care in (nonhospice) inpatient, outpatient, community, and home-based settings.

Main outcomes and measures: Consensus was defined a priori as at least 70% agreement among experts. A criterion was coded as major if the experts advocated that meeting 1 criterion alone was satisfactory to justify a referral. Data were summarized using descriptive statistics.

Results: Of the 63 invited and eligible panelists, the response rate was 58 (92.1%) in round 1, 58 (92.1%) in round 2, and 60 (95.2%) in round 3. Of the 58 panelists who provided demographic data in round 1, most were aged 40 to 49 years (28 of 58 [48.3%]), and 29 panelists (50%) each were men and women. Panelists achieved consensus on 15 major and 42 minor criteria for specialist palliative care referral. The 15 major criteria were grouped under 5 categories, including dementia type (eg, rapidly progressive dementia), symptom distress (eg, severe physical symptoms), psychosocial factors or decision-making (eg, request for hastened death, assisted suicide, or euthanasia), comorbidities or complications (eg, ≥2 episodes of aspiration pneumonia in the past 12 months); and hospital use (eg, ≥2 hospitalizations within the past 3 months).

Conclusions and relevance: In this Delphi survey study, international experts reached consensus on a range of criteria for referral to specialist palliative care. With testing and validation, these criteria may be used to standardize specialist palliative care access for patients with dementia across various care settings.

痴呆患者专科姑息治疗转诊标准。
重要性:痴呆症患者有相当多的支持性护理需求。专科姑息治疗可能是有益的,但目前尚不清楚哪些病人最适合转诊以及何时应该转诊。目的:确定一套共识转诊标准专科姑息治疗痴呆症患者。设计、设置和参与者:在这项采用三轮德尔菲调查的调查研究中,来自五大洲的具有痴呆和姑息治疗整合专业知识的国际多学科临床医生小组被要求对83项假定的转诊标准进行评分(来自先前的系统审查和指导委员会讨论)。专科姑息治疗被定义为一个跨学科的团队,由具有高级姑息医学知识和技能的从业人员组成,为(非临终关怀)住院病人、门诊病人、社区和家庭提供专科水平的姑息治疗咨询服务。主要结果和措施:共识被先验地定义为专家之间至少70%的同意。如果专家主张仅满足一项标准就足以证明转诊是合理的,则该标准被编码为主要标准。数据采用描述性统计进行汇总。结果:在63名受邀和合格的小组成员中,第1轮应答率为58人(92.1%),第2轮应答率为58人(92.1%),第3轮应答率为60人(95.2%)。在第1轮提供人口统计数据的58名小组成员中,大多数年龄在40至49岁之间(58人中有28人[48.3%]),男女各29人(50%)。小组成员就专科姑息治疗转诊的15项主要标准和42项次要标准达成共识。15个主要标准分为5类,包括痴呆类型(如快速进展性痴呆)、症状困扰(如严重躯体症状)、社会心理因素或决策(如请求加速死亡、协助自杀或安乐死)、合并症或并发症(如过去12个月内≥2次吸入性肺炎发作);医院使用(例如,过去3个月内住院≥2次)。结论和相关性:在这个德尔菲调查研究中,国际专家就转诊到专科姑息治疗的一系列标准达成了共识。通过测试和验证,这些标准可用于标准化不同护理环境中痴呆症患者的专科姑息治疗。
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
JAMA Network Open
JAMA Network Open Medicine-General Medicine
CiteScore
16.00
自引率
2.90%
发文量
2126
审稿时长
16 weeks
期刊介绍: JAMA Network Open, a member of the esteemed JAMA Network, stands as an international, peer-reviewed, open-access general medical journal.The publication is dedicated to disseminating research across various health disciplines and countries, encompassing clinical care, innovation in health care, health policy, and global health. JAMA Network Open caters to clinicians, investigators, and policymakers, providing a platform for valuable insights and advancements in the medical field. As part of the JAMA Network, a consortium of peer-reviewed general medical and specialty publications, JAMA Network Open contributes to the collective knowledge and understanding within the medical community.
×
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