{"title":"临终舒适度评估,门诊就足够了吗?用镇痛/痛觉指数和门诊对非沟通障碍患者进行综合舒适度评估的回顾性队列研究。","authors":"Loïc Bauschert, Chloé Prod'homme, Magali Pierrat, Luc Chevalier, Hélène Lesaffre, Licia Touzet","doi":"10.1177/08258597211063687","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Comfort evaluation is one of the major challenges in the palliative care setting, particularly when it comes to non-communicative patients. For this specific population, validated tools for comfort evaluation are scarce and healthcare professionals have to rely on their clinical sense and experience. <b>Objectives:</b> To provide arguments for the use of Analgesia/Nociception Index (ANI) monitoring in order to improve clinical comfort evaluation. <b>Methods:</b> We conducted a retrospective cohort study of non-communicative patients at the end of their lives whose comfort was evaluated clinically and with ANI. We focused on the coherence or discordance of clinical and ANI evaluations and on pharmacological interventions driven by them. <b>Results:</b> 58 evaluations from 33 patients were analyzed. Clinical and demographic characteristics were highly variable. Simultaneous clinical and ANI evaluations were concordant in 45 measurements (77.58%), leading mostly to no treatment modification when indicating comfort and to increasing anxiolytic or pain-relief treatments when indicating discomfort. Thirteen (22.41%) evaluations were discordant, leading mostly to treatment incrementation. <b>Conclusion:</b> We suggest that the ANI monitor is a reliable tool in the palliative setting and may help provide patients with the best symptom relief and the most appropriate therapeutics.</p>","PeriodicalId":51096,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Palliative Care","volume":" ","pages":"122-128"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"End-of-life Comfort Evaluation, is Clinic Enough? A Retrospective Cohort Study of Combined Comfort Evaluation with <i>Analgesia/Nociception Index</i> and Clinic in non-Communicative Patients.\",\"authors\":\"Loïc Bauschert, Chloé Prod'homme, Magali Pierrat, Luc Chevalier, Hélène Lesaffre, Licia Touzet\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/08258597211063687\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b>Background:</b> Comfort evaluation is one of the major challenges in the palliative care setting, particularly when it comes to non-communicative patients. For this specific population, validated tools for comfort evaluation are scarce and healthcare professionals have to rely on their clinical sense and experience. <b>Objectives:</b> To provide arguments for the use of Analgesia/Nociception Index (ANI) monitoring in order to improve clinical comfort evaluation. <b>Methods:</b> We conducted a retrospective cohort study of non-communicative patients at the end of their lives whose comfort was evaluated clinically and with ANI. We focused on the coherence or discordance of clinical and ANI evaluations and on pharmacological interventions driven by them. <b>Results:</b> 58 evaluations from 33 patients were analyzed. Clinical and demographic characteristics were highly variable. Simultaneous clinical and ANI evaluations were concordant in 45 measurements (77.58%), leading mostly to no treatment modification when indicating comfort and to increasing anxiolytic or pain-relief treatments when indicating discomfort. Thirteen (22.41%) evaluations were discordant, leading mostly to treatment incrementation. <b>Conclusion:</b> We suggest that the ANI monitor is a reliable tool in the palliative setting and may help provide patients with the best symptom relief and the most appropriate therapeutics.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":51096,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of Palliative Care\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"122-128\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.3000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-04-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of Palliative Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/08258597211063687\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2021/11/29 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/08258597211063687","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2021/11/29 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
背景:舒适度评估是姑息治疗中的主要挑战之一,尤其是在涉及不善交流的病人时。针对这一特殊人群,舒适度评估的有效工具非常缺乏,医护人员必须依靠自己的临床感觉和经验。目标:为使用镇痛/痛觉指数(ANI)监测以改善临床舒适度评估提供论据。方法:我们对生命末期不善交流的患者进行了一项回顾性队列研究,对他们的舒适度进行了临床评估和 ANI 评估。我们重点研究了临床评估和 ANI 评估的一致性或不一致性,以及由它们驱动的药物干预。结果:对 33 名患者的 58 项评估进行了分析。临床和人口统计学特征差异很大。同时进行的临床和 ANI 评估有 45 次(77.58%)是一致的,当显示舒适时,大多数情况下不需要修改治疗方案;当显示不适时,则需要增加抗焦虑或止痛治疗。有 13 次(22.41%)评估结果不一致,主要导致增加治疗次数。结论:我们认为,在姑息治疗中,ANI 监测仪是一种可靠的工具,有助于为患者提供最佳的症状缓解和最合适的治疗。
End-of-life Comfort Evaluation, is Clinic Enough? A Retrospective Cohort Study of Combined Comfort Evaluation with Analgesia/Nociception Index and Clinic in non-Communicative Patients.
Background: Comfort evaluation is one of the major challenges in the palliative care setting, particularly when it comes to non-communicative patients. For this specific population, validated tools for comfort evaluation are scarce and healthcare professionals have to rely on their clinical sense and experience. Objectives: To provide arguments for the use of Analgesia/Nociception Index (ANI) monitoring in order to improve clinical comfort evaluation. Methods: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of non-communicative patients at the end of their lives whose comfort was evaluated clinically and with ANI. We focused on the coherence or discordance of clinical and ANI evaluations and on pharmacological interventions driven by them. Results: 58 evaluations from 33 patients were analyzed. Clinical and demographic characteristics were highly variable. Simultaneous clinical and ANI evaluations were concordant in 45 measurements (77.58%), leading mostly to no treatment modification when indicating comfort and to increasing anxiolytic or pain-relief treatments when indicating discomfort. Thirteen (22.41%) evaluations were discordant, leading mostly to treatment incrementation. Conclusion: We suggest that the ANI monitor is a reliable tool in the palliative setting and may help provide patients with the best symptom relief and the most appropriate therapeutics.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Palliative Care is a quarterly, peer-reviewed, international and interdisciplinary forum for practical, critical thought on palliative care and palliative medicine. JPC publishes high-quality original research, opinion papers/commentaries, narrative and humanities works, case reports/case series, and reports on international activities and comparative palliative care.