临终关怀专家对临终关怀质量指标的相对重要性:来自离散选择实验的发现。

IF 3.9 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Eric Andrew Finkelstein, Juan Marcos Gonzalez Sepulveda
{"title":"临终关怀专家对临终关怀质量指标的相对重要性:来自离散选择实验的发现。","authors":"Eric Andrew Finkelstein, Juan Marcos Gonzalez Sepulveda","doi":"10.1177/02692163251366092","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>End-of-life care delivery is shaped by subject matter experts who influence treatment decisions, policies, and programs and set guidelines that inform end-of-life care practices. However, little is known about what these experts view as most important when delivering high quality end-of-life care.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To quantify the relative value that experts place on 13 key indicators of care quality at end-of-life and to assess whether preferences vary across high- and low/middle income countries.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional survey using a discrete choice experiment that asks respondents to trade-off between three hypothetical care providers with varying ratings across indicators, based on a five-star rating system. Mixed logit regression analysis was used to estimate the relative importance for each indicator, such that the sum across indicators totals 100%.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>A total of 193 experts from 121 countries.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Experts placed greatest relative importance on managing pain and discomfort (19.0%), quality of life extending treatments (10.0%), treating patients kindly (9.1%), and ensuring costs are not a barrier to treatment (8.7%). They placed least emphasis on non-medical concerns (3.7%) and spiritual needs (2.2%). No differences were found between respondents from high- and low/middle income countries.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results reinforce the importance of pain management as the most important indicator of end-of-life quality. Results further suggest that excessive emphasis on life extension may not be the best use of scarce resources and greater value may be achieved by focusing on other aspects of end-of-life care quality. These results hold for both high- and low/middle income countries.</p>","PeriodicalId":19849,"journal":{"name":"Palliative Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"2692163251366092"},"PeriodicalIF":3.9000,"publicationDate":"2025-10-07","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Palliative care experts' relative importance of end-of-life care quality indicators: Findings from a discrete choice experiment.\",\"authors\":\"Eric Andrew Finkelstein, Juan Marcos Gonzalez Sepulveda\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/02692163251366092\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>End-of-life care delivery is shaped by subject matter experts who influence treatment decisions, policies, and programs and set guidelines that inform end-of-life care practices. However, little is known about what these experts view as most important when delivering high quality end-of-life care.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To quantify the relative value that experts place on 13 key indicators of care quality at end-of-life and to assess whether preferences vary across high- and low/middle income countries.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Cross-sectional survey using a discrete choice experiment that asks respondents to trade-off between three hypothetical care providers with varying ratings across indicators, based on a five-star rating system. Mixed logit regression analysis was used to estimate the relative importance for each indicator, such that the sum across indicators totals 100%.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>A total of 193 experts from 121 countries.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Experts placed greatest relative importance on managing pain and discomfort (19.0%), quality of life extending treatments (10.0%), treating patients kindly (9.1%), and ensuring costs are not a barrier to treatment (8.7%). They placed least emphasis on non-medical concerns (3.7%) and spiritual needs (2.2%). No differences were found between respondents from high- and low/middle income countries.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>These results reinforce the importance of pain management as the most important indicator of end-of-life quality. Results further suggest that excessive emphasis on life extension may not be the best use of scarce resources and greater value may be achieved by focusing on other aspects of end-of-life care quality. These results hold for both high- and low/middle income countries.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":19849,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Palliative Medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"2692163251366092\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-10-07\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Palliative Medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692163251366092\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Palliative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692163251366092","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:临终关怀交付是由影响治疗决策、政策和计划的主题专家塑造的,并为临终关怀实践制定指导方针。然而,在提供高质量的临终关怀时,这些专家认为最重要的是什么,我们知之甚少。目的:量化专家对临终关怀质量的13个关键指标的相对价值,并评估高收入国家和中低收入国家的偏好是否有所不同。设计:采用离散选择实验的横断面调查,要求受访者在三个假设的护理提供者之间进行权衡,这些提供者在指标上具有不同的评级,基于五星级评级系统。采用混合logit回归分析估计各指标的相对重要性,使各指标之和达到100%。参与者:来自121个国家的193名专家。结果:专家认为最重要的是控制疼痛和不适(19.0%)、延长生活质量(10.0%)、善待患者(9.1%)和确保费用不是治疗的障碍(8.7%)。他们最不重视非医疗问题(3.7%)和精神需求(2.2%)。在高收入国家和低收入/中等收入国家的受访者之间没有发现差异。结论:这些结果强化了疼痛管理作为临终质量最重要指标的重要性。结果进一步表明,过度强调生命延长可能不是稀缺资源的最佳利用,关注临终关怀质量的其他方面可能会获得更大的价值。这些结果适用于高收入国家和中低收入国家。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Palliative care experts' relative importance of end-of-life care quality indicators: Findings from a discrete choice experiment.

Background: End-of-life care delivery is shaped by subject matter experts who influence treatment decisions, policies, and programs and set guidelines that inform end-of-life care practices. However, little is known about what these experts view as most important when delivering high quality end-of-life care.

Aim: To quantify the relative value that experts place on 13 key indicators of care quality at end-of-life and to assess whether preferences vary across high- and low/middle income countries.

Design: Cross-sectional survey using a discrete choice experiment that asks respondents to trade-off between three hypothetical care providers with varying ratings across indicators, based on a five-star rating system. Mixed logit regression analysis was used to estimate the relative importance for each indicator, such that the sum across indicators totals 100%.

Participants: A total of 193 experts from 121 countries.

Results: Experts placed greatest relative importance on managing pain and discomfort (19.0%), quality of life extending treatments (10.0%), treating patients kindly (9.1%), and ensuring costs are not a barrier to treatment (8.7%). They placed least emphasis on non-medical concerns (3.7%) and spiritual needs (2.2%). No differences were found between respondents from high- and low/middle income countries.

Conclusion: These results reinforce the importance of pain management as the most important indicator of end-of-life quality. Results further suggest that excessive emphasis on life extension may not be the best use of scarce resources and greater value may be achieved by focusing on other aspects of end-of-life care quality. These results hold for both high- and low/middle income countries.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Palliative Medicine
Palliative Medicine 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
125
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Palliative Medicine is a highly ranked, peer reviewed scholarly journal dedicated to improving knowledge and clinical practice in the palliative care of patients with far advanced disease. This outstanding journal features editorials, original papers, review articles, case reports, correspondence and book reviews. Essential reading for all members of the palliative care team. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
×
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信