How well do current instruments using bereaved relatives’ views evaluate care for dying patients?

Author:

Mayland CR1,Williams EMI2,Ellershaw JE1

Affiliation:

1. Marie Curie Palliative Care Institute, Royal Liverpool & Broadgreen University Hospitals Trust, Liverpool

2. Division of Public Health, University of Liverpool, Liverpool

Abstract

Background: Providing good quality of care for dying patients and their families has been highlighted as a national priority in the UK. Defining and measuring the quality of this care is therefore important. Using the views of patients has practical and ethical difficulties, so an alternative approach is to seek the views of bereaved relatives and close friends after the patients’ death. Aim: To identify and critically appraise instruments previously used with bereaved relatives to measure the quality of care for dying patients and the level of support provided to the family. Methods: A literature review was undertaken using Medline, Cinahl, Embase and AMED databases from 1985 to 2005. The search strategy was based on the following headings: quality of care, dying, assessment and relatives. Key criteria were set for the appraisal of each instrument. Results: Analysis of the 229 articles identified from the searches, yielded seven instruments used with bereaved relatives to assess the quality of ‘care for the dying’. Discussion: Each of these instruments was carefully constructed and all but one had clear documentation of validity and reliability measures. Two instruments used ‘satisfaction’ as an outcome measure, limiting their ability to discriminate between adequate and excellent care. Only one instrument was developed in the UK making it more ‘user-friendly’ for direct use in the UK. Conclusion: None of the instruments in their current format could comprehensively evaluate ‘care for the dying’ in the UK healthcare setting. We would propose to develop and validate a tool specifically assigned for this purpose.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine,General Medicine

Cited by 33 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3