Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrar
Más filtros

Banco de datos
País/Región como asunto
Tipo del documento
País de afiliación
Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Int Urol Nephrol ; 48(6): 859-69, 2016 Jun.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26984833

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: To identify and prioritize potential topics to be addressed in the development of European multidisciplinary guidelines on the management of chronic kidney disease stage 3b-5 in older patients. METHODS: We composed a list of 47 potential guideline topics by reviewing the literature, consulting online 461 nephrologists and 107 geriatricians, and obtaining expert input. A multidisciplinary panel of twelve experts then prioritized the topics during a face-to-face consensus meeting, following a nominal group technique structure with two voting rounds. Topics were rated on a 9-point scale ranging from 1 ('not at all important') to 9 ('critically important'). RESULTS: The highest rating (median; range) was assigned to 'Screening and referral' (8.5; 2.0). Eight topics shared the second highest rating with a median priority score of 8.0 (2.0) and included 'Starting dialysis or not' and 'Accurate assessment of renal function.' 'Targets for and treatment of diabetes' received the lowest rating with (3.0; 6.0). CONCLUSIONS: This joint initiative of the European Renal Association-European Dialysis Transplant Association (ERA-EDTA) and the European Union Geriatric Medicine Society (EUGMS) prioritized the development of guidance on interdisciplinary referral of older patients with chronic kidney disease stage 3b-5. Future guidance will therefore focus on identifying prognostic scores to predict death and progression to end-stage renal disease, as well as accurate tests for assessment of renal function in older kidney patients. This will contribute to more informed treatment decision making in this growing patient population.


Asunto(s)
Prioridades en Salud , Guías de Práctica Clínica como Asunto , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/terapia , Factores de Edad , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Europa (Continente) , Femenino , Humanos , Masculino , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/complicaciones , Insuficiencia Renal Crónica/diagnóstico
2.
J Pain Symptom Manage ; 50(5): 659-75.e3, 2015 Nov.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26212095

RESUMEN

CONTEXT: There is need for tools to help detect pain or lack of comfort in persons unable to communicate. However, pain and (dis)comfort tools have not been compared, and it is unclear to what extent they discriminate between pain and other possible sources of discomfort, or even if items differ. OBJECTIVES: To map and compare items in tools that assess pain and the broader notion of discomfort or comfort in people with severe dementia or at the end of life. METHODS: Using qualitative content analysis with six classifications, we categorized each item of four thoroughly tested observational pain tools (Pain Assessment in Advanced Dementia [PAINAD], Pain Assessment Checklist for Seniors with Limited Ability to Communicate [PACSLAC], Doloplus-2, and draft Pain Assessment in Impaired Cognition [PAIC]), and four discomfort tools (including distress, comfort, and quality of life in severe dementia or at the end of life; Discomfort Scale-Dementia Alzheimer Type [DS-DAT], Disability Distress Assessment Tool [DisDAT], End-of-Life in Dementia-Comfort Assessment in Dying with Dementia [EOLD-CAD], and Quality of Life in Late-Stage Dementia [QUALID] scale). We calculated median proportions to compare distributions of categories of pain and discomfort tools. RESULTS: We found that, despite variable content across tools, items from pain and discomfort tools overlapped considerably. For example, positive elements such as smiling and spiritual items were more often included in discomfort tools but were not unique to these. Pain tools comprised more "mostly descriptive" (median 0.63 vs. 0.44) and fewer "highly subjective" items (0.06 vs. 0.18); some used time inconsistently, mixing present and past observations. CONCLUSION: This analysis may inform a more rigorous theoretical underpinning and (re)development of pain and discomfort tools and calls for empirical testing of a broad item pool for sensitivity and specificity in detecting and discriminating pain from other sources of discomfort.


Asunto(s)
Demencia/diagnóstico , Dimensión del Dolor , Dolor/diagnóstico , Evaluación de Síntomas/métodos , Demencia/fisiopatología , Práctica Clínica Basada en la Evidencia/métodos , Humanos , Dolor/fisiopatología , Cuidados Paliativos/métodos , Calidad de Vida
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA