综合呼吸和姑息治疗服务的定性评价:患者,护理人员和全科医生的观点。

IF 1.4 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Julie McDonald, Euan Fox, Laura Booth, Jennifer Weil
{"title":"综合呼吸和姑息治疗服务的定性评价:患者,护理人员和全科医生的观点。","authors":"Julie McDonald,&nbsp;Euan Fox,&nbsp;Laura Booth,&nbsp;Jennifer Weil","doi":"10.1071/AH23076","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Objectives Integrated respiratory and palliative care services for people with advanced lung disease provide disease-orientated care until the end of life, alongside symptom management and discussions about future care. This study aimed to explore patient, caregiver and general practitioner perspectives of an integrated respiratory and palliative care service, to understand which components of the service were considered valued and effective. Methods We approached patients, caregivers and general practitioners, to participate in semi-structured phone interviews. A grounded theory approach guided data collection and qualitative analysis. Results Between July and December 2019, 10 patients, eight caregivers and five general practitioners completed interviews. The overarching theme was that of valuing integrated care - the provision of disease-orientated care along with palliative care. Four other major themes emerged: Valuing communication and engagement between patient, caregiver and healthcare professionals - who spoke of 'growing this plan together'; the delivery of person-centred care - where physicians 'actually listen and you are not treated like a number'; the reality of action plan use in serious illness - while many found plans 'certainly' do help, others described when they were simply 'too ill to do the action plan'; and finally, divergent preferences for discussions about future care - while some patients felt this subject was 'better left alone', caregivers consistently reported their preference was to 'make a plan.' Conclusion Consumer perspectives highlight the service was valued for delivering personalised care with high communication standards. Similar services should appreciate the usefulness and limitations of action plan use in advanced lung disease, and be sensitive to potential diverging preferences of the patient and caregiver when discussing future care.</p>","PeriodicalId":55425,"journal":{"name":"Australian Health Review","volume":"47 4","pages":"463-471"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2023-08-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Qualitative evaluation of an integrated respiratory and palliative care service: patient, caregiver and general practitioner perspectives.\",\"authors\":\"Julie McDonald,&nbsp;Euan Fox,&nbsp;Laura Booth,&nbsp;Jennifer Weil\",\"doi\":\"10.1071/AH23076\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>Objectives Integrated respiratory and palliative care services for people with advanced lung disease provide disease-orientated care until the end of life, alongside symptom management and discussions about future care. This study aimed to explore patient, caregiver and general practitioner perspectives of an integrated respiratory and palliative care service, to understand which components of the service were considered valued and effective. Methods We approached patients, caregivers and general practitioners, to participate in semi-structured phone interviews. A grounded theory approach guided data collection and qualitative analysis. Results Between July and December 2019, 10 patients, eight caregivers and five general practitioners completed interviews. The overarching theme was that of valuing integrated care - the provision of disease-orientated care along with palliative care. Four other major themes emerged: Valuing communication and engagement between patient, caregiver and healthcare professionals - who spoke of 'growing this plan together'; the delivery of person-centred care - where physicians 'actually listen and you are not treated like a number'; the reality of action plan use in serious illness - while many found plans 'certainly' do help, others described when they were simply 'too ill to do the action plan'; and finally, divergent preferences for discussions about future care - while some patients felt this subject was 'better left alone', caregivers consistently reported their preference was to 'make a plan.' Conclusion Consumer perspectives highlight the service was valued for delivering personalised care with high communication standards. Similar services should appreciate the usefulness and limitations of action plan use in advanced lung disease, and be sensitive to potential diverging preferences of the patient and caregiver when discussing future care.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55425,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Australian Health Review\",\"volume\":\"47 4\",\"pages\":\"463-471\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-08-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Australian Health Review\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1071/AH23076\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Australian Health Review","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1071/AH23076","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:为晚期肺部疾病患者提供呼吸和姑息治疗综合服务,提供以疾病为导向的护理,直至生命终结,同时进行症状管理和未来护理的讨论。本研究旨在探讨患者、护理人员和全科医生对综合呼吸和姑息治疗服务的看法,以了解服务的哪些组成部分被认为是有价值和有效的。方法对患者、护理人员和全科医生进行半结构化电话访谈。基于理论的方法指导数据收集和定性分析。结果2019年7月至12月,10名患者、8名护理人员和5名全科医生完成了访谈。最重要的主题是重视综合护理,即提供以疾病为导向的护理和姑息治疗。其他四个主要主题出现了:重视患者、护理人员和医疗保健专业人员之间的沟通和参与——他们谈到了“共同制定这个计划”;提供以人为本的护理——医生“真正倾听,而不是把你当作一个数字”;在严重疾病中使用行动计划的现实情况——虽然许多人认为计划“肯定”有帮助,但其他人则认为他们只是“病得太重,无法执行行动计划”;最后,对于讨论未来护理的不同偏好——虽然一些患者认为这个话题“最好不要管”,但护理人员一致表示,他们更喜欢“制定计划”。结论消费者的观点强调了该服务在提供高沟通标准的个性化护理方面的价值。类似的服务应重视行动计划在晚期肺部疾病中的有用性和局限性,并在讨论未来护理时对患者和护理人员潜在的不同偏好保持敏感。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Qualitative evaluation of an integrated respiratory and palliative care service: patient, caregiver and general practitioner perspectives.

Objectives Integrated respiratory and palliative care services for people with advanced lung disease provide disease-orientated care until the end of life, alongside symptom management and discussions about future care. This study aimed to explore patient, caregiver and general practitioner perspectives of an integrated respiratory and palliative care service, to understand which components of the service were considered valued and effective. Methods We approached patients, caregivers and general practitioners, to participate in semi-structured phone interviews. A grounded theory approach guided data collection and qualitative analysis. Results Between July and December 2019, 10 patients, eight caregivers and five general practitioners completed interviews. The overarching theme was that of valuing integrated care - the provision of disease-orientated care along with palliative care. Four other major themes emerged: Valuing communication and engagement between patient, caregiver and healthcare professionals - who spoke of 'growing this plan together'; the delivery of person-centred care - where physicians 'actually listen and you are not treated like a number'; the reality of action plan use in serious illness - while many found plans 'certainly' do help, others described when they were simply 'too ill to do the action plan'; and finally, divergent preferences for discussions about future care - while some patients felt this subject was 'better left alone', caregivers consistently reported their preference was to 'make a plan.' Conclusion Consumer perspectives highlight the service was valued for delivering personalised care with high communication standards. Similar services should appreciate the usefulness and limitations of action plan use in advanced lung disease, and be sensitive to potential diverging preferences of the patient and caregiver when discussing future care.

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
Australian Health Review
Australian Health Review 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
5.60%
发文量
134
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Australian Health Review is an international, peer-reviewed journal that publishes contributions on all aspects of health policy, management and governance; healthcare delivery systems; workforce; health financing; and other matters of interest to those working in health care. In addition to analyses and commentary, the journal publishes original research from practitioners – managers and clinicians – and reports of breakthrough projects that demonstrate better ways of delivering care. Australian Health Review explores major national and international health issues and questions, enabling health professionals to keep their fingers on the pulse of the nation’s health decisions and to know what the most influential commentators and decision makers are thinking. Australian Health Review is a valuable resource for managers, policy makers and clinical staff in health organisations, including government departments, hospitals, community centres and aged-care facilities, as well as anyone with an interest in the health industry. Australian Health Review is published by CSIRO Publishing on behalf of the Australian Healthcare and Hospitals Association.
×
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