ISSN 1672-9234 CN 11-5289/R
主管:中国科学技术协会 主办:中华护理学会
出版:中华护理杂志社
收录:中国科学引文数据库(CSCD)来源期刊
   中国期刊全文数据库
   中国核心期刊(遴选)数据库
   中文科技期刊数据库

中华护理教育 ›› 2023, Vol. 20 ›› Issue (11): 1305-1312.doi: 10.3761/j.issn.1672-9234.2023.11.004

• 安宁疗护专题 • 上一篇    下一篇

癌症患者安宁疗护需求评估工具的系统评价

何佳丽(),高静(),吴晨曦,柏丁兮,罗欢,宫笑颜,王薇   

  1. 611137 成都市 成都中医药大学护理学院
  • 收稿日期:2022-09-17 出版日期:2023-11-15 发布日期:2023-11-17
  • 通讯作者: 高静,硕士,教授,E-mail:729012934@qq.com
  • 作者简介:何佳丽,女,本科(硕士在读),E-mail:2826168421@qq.com

A systematic review of the palliative care needs assessment tool for cancer patients

HE Jiali(),GAO Jing(),WU Chenxi,BAI Dingxi,LUO Huan,GONG Xiaoyan,WANG Wei   

  • Received:2022-09-17 Online:2023-11-15 Published:2023-11-17

摘要:

目的 系统评价癌症患者安宁疗护需求评估工具的测量属性。方法 计算机检索PubMed、Embase、Web of Science、CINAHL、Scopus、万方数据库、中国生物医学文献数据库、中国知网和维普数据库,全面检索2022年7月4日以前发表的有关癌症患者安宁疗护需求评估工具的测量属性评价研究。由2名研究者独立筛选文献,提取资料后根据基于共识的健康测量工具遴选标准指南对纳入评估工具的方法学质量及测量性能进行评价。结果 共纳入10项研究,涉及10个癌症患者安宁疗护需求评估工具,均未报告跨文化效度、测量误差及反应性。有高质量的证据证明晚期癌症病人需求评估问卷、修订后的中文版安宁疗护问题与需求问卷的内部一致性和中文版简易版安宁疗护问题与需求问卷结构效度为“不充分”,均被评为C级量表;其他7个量表均为B级量表。其中,中文版晚期癌症患者安宁疗护感知与需求量表有高等级证据表明其结构效度、内部一致性、假设检验为“充分”,测量属性报告更为全面。结论 与其他9个评估工具相比,中文版晚期癌症患者安宁疗护感知与需求量表测量属性报告较为全面,可推荐被暂时使用,但其测量属性还需进一步验证。

关键词: 肿瘤, 安宁疗护需求, 评估工具, 系统评价

Abstract:

Objective To systematically evaluate the measurement properties of the palliative care needs assessment tools for cancer patients. Methods Computer searches of databases were conducted to comprehensively search studies on the evaluation of measurement properties of the hospice needs assessment tool for cancer patients from their establishment to July 4,2022,including PubMed,Embase,Web of Science,CINAHL,Scopus,Wanfang Data,CBM,CNKI,and VIP. The literature was independently screened by two researchers,and the methodological quality and measurement properties of the included assessment tools were evaluated using COSMIN guideline-based information after extraction. Results A total of 10 studies were included,involving 10 scales assessing the palliative care needs with cancer patients. None of 10 assessment tools reported cross-cultural validity,measurement error,and responsiveness. Based on high-quality evidence,the internal consistency of "the evaluation questionnaire on demand of terminal cancer patients" and "the revised Chinese version of the problems and needs in palliative care questionnaire",as well as the structural validity of the Chinese version of the PNPC-sv,were found to be “inadequate”. Therefore,the three scales were recommended as grade C. The other seven scales were recommended as grade B. Among them,the structural validity,internal consistency,and hypothesis testing of the Chinese version of the PPCI were found to be "adequate" based on high-quality evidence,and more balanced measurement properties were reported. Conclusion Compared with the other nine assessment scales,the Chinese version of the PPCI measurement attribute report is more comprehensive and can be recommended for provisional use,though needs further validation of measurement attribution.

Key words: Neoplasms, Palliative care needs, Assessment tools, Systematic review