Bookbinder Marilyn, Blank Arthur E, Arney Elizabeth, Wollner David, Lesage Pauline, McHugh Marlene, Indelicato Rose Anne, Harding Stephen, Barenboim Arkady, Mirozyev Tahir, Portenoy Russell K
Department of Pain Medicine and Palliative Care, Beth Israel Medical Center, New York, New York 10003, USA.
J Pain Symptom Manage. 2005 Jun;29(6):529-43. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2004.05.011.
Prior studies have revealed deficiencies in the care provided to patients dying from advanced medical illnesses in acute care hospitals. These deficiencies are best addressed through system change, which may include the development of clinical pathways and quality improvement models. The Palliative Care for Advanced Disease (PCAD) pathway was developed by an interdisciplinary team and includes a carepath, a daily flowsheet, and a physician order sheet with standard orders for symptom control. To evaluate the utility of PCAD, the clinical pathway was introduced on three hospital units (Oncology, Geriatrics, and an inpatient palliative care/hospice unit) as part of a quality improvement initiative and outcomes were compared to two general medical units receiving usual care. A chart audit tool (CAT) was used to review medical records of 101 patients who died on one of these five units during the year prior to implementation (baseline) and 156 who died during the nine months of the PCAD intervention. Four indices from CAT evaluated change over time: the mean number of 1) symptoms assessed, 2) problematic symptoms, 3) interventions consistent with PCAD, and 4) consultations requested. Nine of 27 (33%) patients on the Oncology/Geriatrics units and all 50 patients who died on the palliative care/hospice unit were placed on PCAD. During the PCAD intervention, dying patients who resided on Geriatrics, Oncology and palliative care/hospice units were more likely to have DNR orders than the comparison units, whereas the comparison units were more likely to use "morphine infusions" and cardiopulmonary resuscitation than the units that received the PCAD intervention. The mean number of symptoms assessed increased significantly in all units (P < 0.001 for all comparisons). The number of problematic symptoms identified (P=0.014) and the number of interventions consistent with PCAD increased only on the palliative care/hospice unit (P=0.021). The number of medical consultations declined on all units and reached significance on the Geriatrics and Oncology units (P=0.037). Although these results reflect less than one year of the PCAD intervention and must be considered preliminary, they suggest that 1) a clinical pathway such as PCAD can serve as a managerial and educational tool to improve the care of the imminently dying inpatient; 2) a PCAD clinical pathway can be implemented on hospital units as a quality improvement initiative--a "PCAD intervention;" 3) a PCAD intervention can change outcomes in a positive direction, as measured using a chart audit tool; 4) a PCAD intervention can promote aggressive symptom assessment and treatment when goals of care are aimed at comfort; and 5) changes may occur in units that do not directly receive the intervention, a phenomenon that suggests the possibility of diffusion. Further study of this systems-oriented approach to change is warranted and should include direct assessment of patient and family outcomes, as well as measures of process.
先前的研究已经揭示了急性护理医院中为身患晚期疾病濒死患者提供的护理存在缺陷。这些缺陷最好通过系统变革来解决,这可能包括制定临床路径和质量改进模型。晚期疾病姑息治疗(PCAD)路径由一个跨学科团队开发,包括一份护理路径、一份每日流程表以及一份带有症状控制标准医嘱的医生医嘱单。为了评估PCAD的效用,作为一项质量改进举措,该临床路径在三个医院科室(肿瘤科、老年科以及一个住院姑息治疗/临终关怀科室)引入,并将结果与接受常规护理的两个普通内科科室进行比较。使用一份病历审核工具(CAT)来审查在实施前一年(基线期)在这五个科室之一死亡的101名患者以及在PCAD干预的九个月期间死亡的156名患者的病历。来自CAT的四个指标评估随时间的变化:1)评估的症状平均数量,2)有问题的症状数量,3)与PCAD一致的干预措施数量,以及4)请求的会诊数量。肿瘤科/老年科的27名患者中有9名(33%)以及在姑息治疗/临终关怀科室死亡的所有50名患者被纳入PCAD。在PCAD干预期间,住在老年科、肿瘤科和姑息治疗/临终关怀科室的濒死患者比对照科室更有可能有“不要复苏”医嘱,而对照科室比接受PCAD干预的科室更有可能使用“吗啡输注”和进行心肺复苏。所有科室评估的症状平均数量均显著增加(所有比较P<0.001)。识别出的有问题的症状数量(P=0.014)以及与PCAD一致的干预措施数量仅在姑息治疗/临终关怀科室增加(P=0.021)。所有科室的医疗会诊数量均下降,在老年科和肿瘤科达到显著水平(P=0.037)。尽管这些结果反映的是PCAD干预不到一年的情况,必须视为初步结果,但它们表明:1)像PCAD这样的临床路径可以作为一种管理和教育工具,以改善濒死住院患者的护理;2)PCAD临床路径可以作为一项质量改进举措在医院科室实施——一种“PCAD干预”;3)使用病历审核工具衡量,PCAD干预可以使结果朝着积极方向改变;4)当护理目标旨在缓解痛苦时,PCAD干预可以促进积极的症状评估和治疗;5)未直接接受干预的科室可能会出现变化,这一现象表明存在传播的可能性。有必要对这种面向系统的变革方法进行进一步研究,研究应包括对患者和家属结果的直接评估以及过程测量。