为德国长期机械通气患者提供护理-从卫生专业人员的角度来看,现状和行动需求/德国Die Versorgung langzeitbeatmeter Patienten - Aktuelle situation and handlungshedarfe aus der Sicht von Gesundheitsberufsangeh

Y. Lehmann, S. Stark, M. Ewers
{"title":"为德国长期机械通气患者提供护理-从卫生专业人员的角度来看,现状和行动需求/德国Die Versorgung langzeitbeatmeter Patienten - Aktuelle situation and handlungshedarfe aus der Sicht von Gesundheitsberufsangeh","authors":"Y. Lehmann, S. Stark, M. Ewers","doi":"10.2478/ijhp-2020-0006","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Abstract Background The number of patients depending on long-term invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) has been increasing for several years. Anecdotal reports indicate heterogeneous health structures, opaque patient pathways, nontransparent and sometimes questionable practices in individual areas of care, inadequate quality standards and control mechanisms in Germany. However, there is hardly any empirical data on this topic. Aim To report findings from a qualitative study conducted as part of a complex research project to assess the appropriateness of care provided to IMV patients in Germany. Methods Thirteen semi-structured expert interviews were conducted with 22 health professionals providing care for IMV patients. The data analysis was conducted with MAXQDA according to the framework by Meuser and Nagel. Results Interviewees emphasized similar healthcare deficits. They considered health providers to be nontransparent and influenced by secondary interests. Quality of care is reported to be jeopardized by shortage of trained staff. Warranty of self-determination and participatory decision-making is not a matter of fact. Clarifying issues of sustaining life, quality of life and shaping the end of life is often ignored. The professionals are familiar with the patient pathways, allocation processes and responsibilities described in existing guidelines, but criticize the fact that they are not sufficiently binding. Accordingly, patient pathways are frequently individual results of experience-based, informal networking, and often left to chance. Conclusions The results point to a considerable need for action to reach an appropriate, integrated, patient-centered level of care for long-term IMV patients and ensure its quality.","PeriodicalId":91706,"journal":{"name":"International journal of health professions","volume":"17 1","pages":"53 - 65"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"3","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Providing care to long-term mechanically ventilated patients in Germany – Current situation and needs for action from the perspective of health professionals / Die Versorgung langzeitbeatmeter Patienten in Deutschland – Aktuelle Situation und Handlungsbedarfe aus der Sicht von Gesundheitsberufsangeh\",\"authors\":\"Y. Lehmann, S. Stark, M. Ewers\",\"doi\":\"10.2478/ijhp-2020-0006\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Abstract Background The number of patients depending on long-term invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) has been increasing for several years. Anecdotal reports indicate heterogeneous health structures, opaque patient pathways, nontransparent and sometimes questionable practices in individual areas of care, inadequate quality standards and control mechanisms in Germany. However, there is hardly any empirical data on this topic. Aim To report findings from a qualitative study conducted as part of a complex research project to assess the appropriateness of care provided to IMV patients in Germany. Methods Thirteen semi-structured expert interviews were conducted with 22 health professionals providing care for IMV patients. The data analysis was conducted with MAXQDA according to the framework by Meuser and Nagel. Results Interviewees emphasized similar healthcare deficits. They considered health providers to be nontransparent and influenced by secondary interests. Quality of care is reported to be jeopardized by shortage of trained staff. Warranty of self-determination and participatory decision-making is not a matter of fact. Clarifying issues of sustaining life, quality of life and shaping the end of life is often ignored. The professionals are familiar with the patient pathways, allocation processes and responsibilities described in existing guidelines, but criticize the fact that they are not sufficiently binding. Accordingly, patient pathways are frequently individual results of experience-based, informal networking, and often left to chance. Conclusions The results point to a considerable need for action to reach an appropriate, integrated, patient-centered level of care for long-term IMV patients and ensure its quality.\",\"PeriodicalId\":91706,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"International journal of health professions\",\"volume\":\"17 1\",\"pages\":\"53 - 65\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2020-01-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"3\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"International journal of health professions\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.2478/ijhp-2020-0006\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of health professions","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.2478/ijhp-2020-0006","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 3

摘要

背景近年来,依赖长期有创机械通气(IMV)的患者数量不断增加。轶事报告表明,德国的卫生结构参差不齐,病人途径不透明,个别护理领域的做法不透明,有时存在问题,质量标准和控制机制不足。然而,几乎没有任何关于这一主题的实证数据。目的报告一项定性研究的结果,该研究是一项复杂研究项目的一部分,旨在评估德国向IMV患者提供护理的适宜性。方法采用13个半结构式专家访谈法,对22名为IMV患者提供护理的医护人员进行访谈。根据Meuser和Nagel的框架,使用MAXQDA进行数据分析。结果受访者强调了类似的医疗保健缺陷。他们认为保健提供者不透明,受次要利益的影响。据报告,由于缺乏训练有素的工作人员,护理质量受到损害。自决和参与性决策的保证不是事实问题。澄清维持生命、生活质量和塑造生命终结的问题往往被忽视。专业人员熟悉现有指南中描述的患者途径、分配过程和责任,但批评它们没有足够的约束力。因此,病人的路径往往是基于经验的个人结果,非正式的网络,往往留给机会。结论需要采取行动,为长期IMV患者提供适当的、综合的、以患者为中心的护理,并确保其质量。
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
Providing care to long-term mechanically ventilated patients in Germany – Current situation and needs for action from the perspective of health professionals / Die Versorgung langzeitbeatmeter Patienten in Deutschland – Aktuelle Situation und Handlungsbedarfe aus der Sicht von Gesundheitsberufsangeh
Abstract Background The number of patients depending on long-term invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) has been increasing for several years. Anecdotal reports indicate heterogeneous health structures, opaque patient pathways, nontransparent and sometimes questionable practices in individual areas of care, inadequate quality standards and control mechanisms in Germany. However, there is hardly any empirical data on this topic. Aim To report findings from a qualitative study conducted as part of a complex research project to assess the appropriateness of care provided to IMV patients in Germany. Methods Thirteen semi-structured expert interviews were conducted with 22 health professionals providing care for IMV patients. The data analysis was conducted with MAXQDA according to the framework by Meuser and Nagel. Results Interviewees emphasized similar healthcare deficits. They considered health providers to be nontransparent and influenced by secondary interests. Quality of care is reported to be jeopardized by shortage of trained staff. Warranty of self-determination and participatory decision-making is not a matter of fact. Clarifying issues of sustaining life, quality of life and shaping the end of life is often ignored. The professionals are familiar with the patient pathways, allocation processes and responsibilities described in existing guidelines, but criticize the fact that they are not sufficiently binding. Accordingly, patient pathways are frequently individual results of experience-based, informal networking, and often left to chance. Conclusions The results point to a considerable need for action to reach an appropriate, integrated, patient-centered level of care for long-term IMV patients and ensure its quality.
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Interdisciplinary cooperation in the outpatient practice: results from a focus group interview with occupational therapists, speech and language therapists and physiotherapists / Gestaltung der interdisziplinären Zusammenarbeit in der ambulanten Therapie: Resultate eines Fokusgruppeninterviews mit E The role of lecturers in interprofessional education – a survey of lecturers in Germany / Die Rolle von Dozierenden in der interprofessionellen Ausbildung – eine Befragung von Lehrverantwortlichen in Deutschland Home-based palliative care services from the perspective of family caregivers: an evaluation of the Integrated Palliative Care model in Tyrol / Häusliche Palliativversorgung aus der Sicht der pflegenden Angehörigen - eine Evaluation des Modells Integrierte Palliativversorgung in Tirol Needs-based educational support for parents in the neonatal intensive care unit - perspectives of parent counsellors / Bedarfsorientierte edukative Unterstützung für Eltern nach einer Frühgeburt aus der Perspektive von Elternberaterinnen Outpatient speech and language therapy via videoconferencing in Germany during the COVID-19 pandemic: Experiences of therapists / Videotherapie in der ambulanten Logopädie/Sprachtherapie in Deutschland während der COVID-19 Pandemie: Erfahrungen von Therapeut/innen
×
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