Psychosocial Distress Screening Among Interprofessional Palliative Care Teams: A Narrative Review.

Chelsea K Brown, Cara L Wallace
{"title":"Psychosocial Distress Screening Among Interprofessional Palliative Care Teams: A Narrative Review.","authors":"Chelsea K Brown, Cara L Wallace","doi":"10.1080/15524256.2024.2343052","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"With increased need for palliative care and limited staffing resources, non-social workers are increasingly responsible for screening for urgent psychosocial distress. The National Consensus Project guidelines call for all palliative care team members to be competent in screening across domains. Yet, in contrast to an abundance of evidence-informed tools for palliative social work assessments, standardization for interprofessional psychosocial screening is lacking. This lack of standardized practice may lead to harmful disparities in care delivery. The purpose of this narrative review is to examine current literature on evidence-informed practices for psychosocial screening within palliative care. Google Scholar, a university Summon library search engine, and prominent palliative care journals were searched using the same phrases to locate articles for inclusion. Each article was reviewed and synthesized across common themes. Although an abundance of validated screening tools exists for outpatient oncology-specific settings, there is minimal guidance on psychosocial screening tools intended for specialty palliative care. The most oft-cited tools have been met with concern for validity across diverse palliative care populations and settings. Additional research is needed to operationalize and measure brief psychosocial screening tools that can be validated for use by interprofessional palliative care teams, a stepping-stone for increased equity in palliative care practice.","PeriodicalId":45992,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Social Work in End-of-Life & Palliative Care","volume":"39 1","pages":"1-24"},"PeriodicalIF":1.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-04-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Social Work in End-of-Life & Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/15524256.2024.2343052","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"SOCIAL WORK","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

With increased need for palliative care and limited staffing resources, non-social workers are increasingly responsible for screening for urgent psychosocial distress. The National Consensus Project guidelines call for all palliative care team members to be competent in screening across domains. Yet, in contrast to an abundance of evidence-informed tools for palliative social work assessments, standardization for interprofessional psychosocial screening is lacking. This lack of standardized practice may lead to harmful disparities in care delivery. The purpose of this narrative review is to examine current literature on evidence-informed practices for psychosocial screening within palliative care. Google Scholar, a university Summon library search engine, and prominent palliative care journals were searched using the same phrases to locate articles for inclusion. Each article was reviewed and synthesized across common themes. Although an abundance of validated screening tools exists for outpatient oncology-specific settings, there is minimal guidance on psychosocial screening tools intended for specialty palliative care. The most oft-cited tools have been met with concern for validity across diverse palliative care populations and settings. Additional research is needed to operationalize and measure brief psychosocial screening tools that can be validated for use by interprofessional palliative care teams, a stepping-stone for increased equity in palliative care practice.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
跨专业姑息关怀团队的社会心理压力筛查:叙述性综述。
随着姑息关怀需求的增加和人力资源的有限,非社会工作者越来越多地负责筛查紧急的社会心理困扰。国家共识项目指南要求所有姑息关怀团队成员都能胜任各领域的筛查工作。然而,与用于姑息社会工作评估的大量循证工具形成鲜明对比的是,跨专业的社会心理筛查却缺乏标准化。这种标准化实践的缺乏可能会导致护理服务中存在有害的差异。本叙事性综述旨在研究姑息关怀中社会心理筛查循证实践的现有文献。我们使用相同的短语搜索了谷歌学术、大学Summon图书馆搜索引擎和著名的姑息关怀期刊,以找到要纳入的文章。对每篇文章都进行了审查,并根据共同的主题进行了综合。尽管有大量经过验证的筛查工具适用于肿瘤门诊特定环境,但针对专科姑息关怀的社会心理筛查工具的指导却少之又少。最常被引用的工具在不同姑息关怀人群和环境中的有效性也受到关注。我们需要开展更多的研究来操作和测量简短的社会心理筛查工具,这些工具可以被跨专业姑息关怀团队验证使用,是姑息关怀实践中提高公平性的垫脚石。
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 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.60
自引率
12.50%
发文量
28
期刊介绍: The Journal of Social Work in End-of-Life & Palliative Care, now affiliated with the Social Work in Hospice and Palliative Care Network, explores issues crucial to caring for terminally ill patients and their families. Academics and social work practitioners present current research, articles, and continuing features on the "state of the art" of social work practice, including interdisciplinary interventions, practice innovations, practice evaluations, end-of-life decision-making, grief and bereavement, and ethical and moral issues. The Journal of Social Work in End-of-Life & Palliative Care combines theory and practice to facilitate an understanding of the multi-level issues surrounding care for those in pain and suffering from painful, debilitating, and/or terminal illness.
期刊最新文献
A Phenomenological Study of Clinical Stillbirth Management for Grieving Mothers. How Tangible is an Advance Care Planning Document in Reality? Still Ship at Sea. Disbelief, Distress, & Distrust: Trending Institution Related Emotional Distress During COVID-19. Always Politically Correct: Supporting Seriously Ill Older Populations and Their Families.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1