晚期妇科癌症患者及护理人员姑息治疗与常规治疗效果的meta分析。

IF 1.1 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Indian Journal of Palliative Care Pub Date : 2024-10-01 Epub Date: 2024-09-16 DOI:10.25259/IJPC_145_2024
Kusum Kumari, C Vasantha Kalyani, Sweety Gupta, Pratima Gupta, Latha Venkatesan, Rakhi Gaur, Vijay Lakshmi
{"title":"晚期妇科癌症患者及护理人员姑息治疗与常规治疗效果的meta分析。","authors":"Kusum Kumari, C Vasantha Kalyani, Sweety Gupta, Pratima Gupta, Latha Venkatesan, Rakhi Gaur, Vijay Lakshmi","doi":"10.25259/IJPC_145_2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>In cancer patients, physical and psychological issues are very common. There is a need for family support and high utilisation of healthcare resources commonly. Palliative care (PC) has grown in popularity to better fulfil of needs of patients and their families and potentially lowering hospital costs. Given that the majority of patients still die in hospitals, there is a need for an effective model of PC for advanced gynaecological cancer, as well as the wise allocation of scarce resources. The main aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of PC to conventional treatment for adults with cancer, including gynaecological cancers, and their caregivers. Four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified by searching PubMed, PubMed Central, Clinical Key, Embase and other grey literature from a duration of 2011-2021. Cochrane criteria were used to calculate the risk of bias, and the Grade Profiler Guideline Development Tool was used to check the quality of the included studies. Standardised mean differences (SMDs), I<sup>2</sup> value and forest plot were prepared by using Review Manager 4.0. A total of four RCTs were extracted by following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and found to have a high risk for bias and low to poor quality of evidence. Included study sample sizes ranged from 22 to 104 participants, including 670 people in total, including 289 patients with advanced cancer patients, including gynaecological cancer and 381 unpaid caregivers. Results also showed that PC enhances patients' quality of life (SMD = 0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.29-0.80; I<sup>2</sup> = 76%), lowered symptom burden amongst patients (SMD = -0.75, 95% CI = -1.75-0.25; I<sup>2</sup> = 89%), reduces patient depression (SMD = 0.08, 95% CI = -0.19-0.34; I2 = 0%) and decreases depression in unpaid caregivers (SMD = -0.16, 95% CI = -0.56-0.24; I<sup>2</sup> = 59%). PC treatment increases patients' quality of life and lowers their symptom burden. In comparison to conventional care, it also reduces depression among patients and caregivers. We believe that the findings should be viewed with care until more recent exclusive RCTs are available.</p>","PeriodicalId":13319,"journal":{"name":"Indian Journal of Palliative Care","volume":"30 4","pages":"289-295"},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11618775/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Meta-analysis on Effectiveness of Palliative Care versus Conventional Care amongst Advanced Gynaecological Patients with Cancer and Caregivers.\",\"authors\":\"Kusum Kumari, C Vasantha Kalyani, Sweety Gupta, Pratima Gupta, Latha Venkatesan, Rakhi Gaur, Vijay Lakshmi\",\"doi\":\"10.25259/IJPC_145_2024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>In cancer patients, physical and psychological issues are very common. There is a need for family support and high utilisation of healthcare resources commonly. Palliative care (PC) has grown in popularity to better fulfil of needs of patients and their families and potentially lowering hospital costs. Given that the majority of patients still die in hospitals, there is a need for an effective model of PC for advanced gynaecological cancer, as well as the wise allocation of scarce resources. The main aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of PC to conventional treatment for adults with cancer, including gynaecological cancers, and their caregivers. Four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified by searching PubMed, PubMed Central, Clinical Key, Embase and other grey literature from a duration of 2011-2021. Cochrane criteria were used to calculate the risk of bias, and the Grade Profiler Guideline Development Tool was used to check the quality of the included studies. Standardised mean differences (SMDs), I<sup>2</sup> value and forest plot were prepared by using Review Manager 4.0. A total of four RCTs were extracted by following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and found to have a high risk for bias and low to poor quality of evidence. Included study sample sizes ranged from 22 to 104 participants, including 670 people in total, including 289 patients with advanced cancer patients, including gynaecological cancer and 381 unpaid caregivers. Results also showed that PC enhances patients' quality of life (SMD = 0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.29-0.80; I<sup>2</sup> = 76%), lowered symptom burden amongst patients (SMD = -0.75, 95% CI = -1.75-0.25; I<sup>2</sup> = 89%), reduces patient depression (SMD = 0.08, 95% CI = -0.19-0.34; I2 = 0%) and decreases depression in unpaid caregivers (SMD = -0.16, 95% CI = -0.56-0.24; I<sup>2</sup> = 59%). PC treatment increases patients' quality of life and lowers their symptom burden. In comparison to conventional care, it also reduces depression among patients and caregivers. We believe that the findings should be viewed with care until more recent exclusive RCTs are available.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":13319,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Indian Journal of Palliative Care\",\"volume\":\"30 4\",\"pages\":\"289-295\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11618775/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Indian Journal of Palliative Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25259/IJPC_145_2024\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/9/16 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Indian Journal of Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25259/IJPC_145_2024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/9/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在癌症患者中,生理和心理问题是很常见的。普遍需要家庭支持和医疗保健资源的高度利用。姑息治疗(PC)越来越受欢迎,以更好地满足患者及其家属的需求,并可能降低医院成本。鉴于大多数患者仍然死于医院,因此需要为晚期妇科癌症建立有效的PC模式,并明智地分配稀缺资源。本研究的主要目的是比较PC与常规治疗对成人癌症(包括妇科癌症)及其护理人员的疗效。通过检索PubMed、PubMed Central、Clinical Key、Embase和其他2011-2021年期间的灰色文献,确定了4项随机对照试验(RCTs)。使用Cochrane标准计算偏倚风险,使用Grade Profiler指南开发工具检查纳入研究的质量。采用Review Manager 4.0软件编制标准化平均差(SMDs)、I2值和森林样地。按照系统评价和荟萃分析指南的首选报告项目,共提取了4项随机对照试验,发现它们存在高偏倚风险,证据质量较低或较差。纳入的研究样本量从22到104名参与者不等,总共包括670人,其中包括289名晚期癌症患者,包括妇科癌症患者和381名无偿护理人员。结果还显示,PC提高了患者的生活质量(SMD = 0.26;95%置信区间[CI] = -0.29-0.80;I2 = 76%),减轻了患者的症状负担(SMD = -0.75, 95% CI = -1.75-0.25;I2 = 89%),减少患者抑郁(SMD = 0.08, 95% CI = -0.19-0.34;I2 = 0%)和减少无报酬照顾者的抑郁(SMD = -0.16, 95% CI = -0.56-0.24;I2 = 59%)。PC治疗提高了患者的生活质量,降低了患者的症状负担。与传统护理相比,它还减少了患者和护理人员的抑郁情绪。我们认为,在获得更多的独家随机对照试验之前,应该仔细观察这些发现。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Meta-analysis on Effectiveness of Palliative Care versus Conventional Care amongst Advanced Gynaecological Patients with Cancer and Caregivers.

In cancer patients, physical and psychological issues are very common. There is a need for family support and high utilisation of healthcare resources commonly. Palliative care (PC) has grown in popularity to better fulfil of needs of patients and their families and potentially lowering hospital costs. Given that the majority of patients still die in hospitals, there is a need for an effective model of PC for advanced gynaecological cancer, as well as the wise allocation of scarce resources. The main aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of PC to conventional treatment for adults with cancer, including gynaecological cancers, and their caregivers. Four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified by searching PubMed, PubMed Central, Clinical Key, Embase and other grey literature from a duration of 2011-2021. Cochrane criteria were used to calculate the risk of bias, and the Grade Profiler Guideline Development Tool was used to check the quality of the included studies. Standardised mean differences (SMDs), I2 value and forest plot were prepared by using Review Manager 4.0. A total of four RCTs were extracted by following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and found to have a high risk for bias and low to poor quality of evidence. Included study sample sizes ranged from 22 to 104 participants, including 670 people in total, including 289 patients with advanced cancer patients, including gynaecological cancer and 381 unpaid caregivers. Results also showed that PC enhances patients' quality of life (SMD = 0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] = -0.29-0.80; I2 = 76%), lowered symptom burden amongst patients (SMD = -0.75, 95% CI = -1.75-0.25; I2 = 89%), reduces patient depression (SMD = 0.08, 95% CI = -0.19-0.34; I2 = 0%) and decreases depression in unpaid caregivers (SMD = -0.16, 95% CI = -0.56-0.24; I2 = 59%). PC treatment increases patients' quality of life and lowers their symptom burden. In comparison to conventional care, it also reduces depression among patients and caregivers. We believe that the findings should be viewed with care until more recent exclusive RCTs are available.

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
Indian Journal of Palliative Care
Indian Journal of Palliative Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
57
期刊介绍: Welcome to the website of the Indian Journal of Palliative Care. You have free full text access to recent issues of the journal. The links connect you to •guidelines and systematic reviews in palliative care and oncology •a directory of palliative care programmes in India and IAPC membership •Palliative Care Formulary, book reviews and other educational material •guidance on statistical tests and medical writing.
期刊最新文献
A Prospective Longitudinal Study to Demonstrate the Utility of the Palliative Prognostic Index in Forecasting the Short-term Survival of Patients with Advanced Cancer in India. Brassiere-Wearing Practices and Issues among Post-mastectomy Women: A Systematic Review. Comparison of Efficacy and Safety of Prophylactic Use of Metoclopramide and Haloperidol on Morphine-induced Nausea and Vomiting in Cancer Patients: A Comparative, Randomised, Prospective Study. Development and Validation of Yoga Program for Patients with Chronic Kidney Disease. Effect of Music Therapy on Quality of Life in Geriatric Population: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.
×
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