支持和姑息治疗中患者报告的结果与代理报告的结果:近期文献综述。

IF 1.9 4区 医学 Q3 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care Pub Date : 2023-06-01 Epub Date: 2023-04-06 DOI:10.1097/SPC.0000000000000644
Eva Oldenburger, Julie Devlies, Dylan Callens, Maaike L De Roo
{"title":"支持和姑息治疗中患者报告的结果与代理报告的结果:近期文献综述。","authors":"Eva Oldenburger,&nbsp;Julie Devlies,&nbsp;Dylan Callens,&nbsp;Maaike L De Roo","doi":"10.1097/SPC.0000000000000644","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose of the review: </strong>Patient-reported outcomes are one of the most valuable clinical outcome measures. In palliative care, however, they are often difficult to retrieve. Therefore, proxy-reported outcomes are sometimes used as a surrogate. As there have been concerns about the validity of these by-proxy reports, the authors reviewed the most recent literature for the most recent insights in using proxy-reported outcomes.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The authors found very little new research on patient versus proxy-reported outcomes in palliative care. The results of the studies the authors found seem to correlate with older evidence concluding that there are many factors influencing a discrepancy between patients' outcomes and how this is perceived by their proxies, such as the well-being paradox, caregiver burden, and the proxies' own mental well-being.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>While proxies' opinions and knowledge of the patients' values are important factors to consider, proxy-reported outcomes should be used with caution and viewed as a complementary perspective rather than a true substitute for the individual patient's outcome.</p>","PeriodicalId":48837,"journal":{"name":"Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Patient-reported outcomes versus proxy-reported outcomes in supportive and palliative care: a summary of recent literature.\",\"authors\":\"Eva Oldenburger,&nbsp;Julie Devlies,&nbsp;Dylan Callens,&nbsp;Maaike L De Roo\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/SPC.0000000000000644\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose of the review: </strong>Patient-reported outcomes are one of the most valuable clinical outcome measures. In palliative care, however, they are often difficult to retrieve. Therefore, proxy-reported outcomes are sometimes used as a surrogate. As there have been concerns about the validity of these by-proxy reports, the authors reviewed the most recent literature for the most recent insights in using proxy-reported outcomes.</p><p><strong>Recent findings: </strong>The authors found very little new research on patient versus proxy-reported outcomes in palliative care. The results of the studies the authors found seem to correlate with older evidence concluding that there are many factors influencing a discrepancy between patients' outcomes and how this is perceived by their proxies, such as the well-being paradox, caregiver burden, and the proxies' own mental well-being.</p><p><strong>Summary: </strong>While proxies' opinions and knowledge of the patients' values are important factors to consider, proxy-reported outcomes should be used with caution and viewed as a complementary perspective rather than a true substitute for the individual patient's outcome.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48837,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-06-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPC.0000000000000644\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/4/6 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/SPC.0000000000000644","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/4/6 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

综述目的:患者报告的结果是最有价值的临床结果指标之一。然而,在姑息治疗中,它们往往很难恢复。因此,代理报告的结果有时被用作代理。由于人们担心这些代理报告的有效性,作者回顾了最新的文献,以了解使用代理报告结果的最新见解。最近的发现:作者发现很少有关于姑息治疗中患者与代理报告结果的新研究。作者发现的研究结果似乎与旧的证据相关,这些证据得出的结论是,有许多因素会影响患者的结果与其代理人对结果的看法之间的差异,例如幸福悖论、照顾者负担、,以及代理人自身的心理健康状况。总结:虽然代理人的意见和对患者价值观的了解是需要考虑的重要因素,但应谨慎使用代理人报告的结果,并将其视为一种互补的视角,而不是患者个体结果的真正替代品。
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
Patient-reported outcomes versus proxy-reported outcomes in supportive and palliative care: a summary of recent literature.

Purpose of the review: Patient-reported outcomes are one of the most valuable clinical outcome measures. In palliative care, however, they are often difficult to retrieve. Therefore, proxy-reported outcomes are sometimes used as a surrogate. As there have been concerns about the validity of these by-proxy reports, the authors reviewed the most recent literature for the most recent insights in using proxy-reported outcomes.

Recent findings: The authors found very little new research on patient versus proxy-reported outcomes in palliative care. The results of the studies the authors found seem to correlate with older evidence concluding that there are many factors influencing a discrepancy between patients' outcomes and how this is perceived by their proxies, such as the well-being paradox, caregiver burden, and the proxies' own mental well-being.

Summary: While proxies' opinions and knowledge of the patients' values are important factors to consider, proxy-reported outcomes should be used with caution and viewed as a complementary perspective rather than a true substitute for the individual patient's outcome.

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
Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care
Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
3.70
自引率
0.00%
发文量
54
期刊介绍: A reader-friendly resource, Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care provides an up-to-date account of the most important advances in the field of supportive and palliative care. Each issue contains either two or three sections delivering a diverse and comprehensive coverage of all the key issues, including end-of-life management, gastrointestinal systems and respiratory problems. Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care is an indispensable journal for the busy clinician, researcher or student.
期刊最新文献
Advances in breathlessness support services for people with serious illness. Bridging the care gap: radiation therapy in elderly and frail cancer patients. The gut microbiome and the brain. Is there a role for capsaicin in Cancer pain management? Comparing the EORTC QLQ-LC13, EORTC QLQ-LC29, and the FACT-L for assessment of quality of life in patients with lung cancer - an updated systematic review.
×
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