A Qualitative Investigation of Patients’ and Caregivers’ Experiences of Severe Sepsis*
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
OBJECTIVES: To explore and describe the subjective experiences and long-term impact of severe sepsis on survivors of severe sepsis and their informal caregivers (e.g., spouse or family member) through qualitative research methods. DESIGN: A qualitative exploratory study using semi-structured interviews with survivors of severe sepsis and their informal caregivers in the United Kingdom and United States. Participants also completed a demographic background form and sites provided medical history details. Transcripts were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach. SETTING: Patients were recruited from a large National Health Service hospital in the United Kingdom and a level 1 trauma center hospital in the United States. Caregivers were recruited through eligible patients. Interviews were conducted either face to face in participant's homes or another convenient location or over the telephone. PATIENTS: Patients who were 18 years old or older and had experienced an episode of severe sepsis in the previous 12 months were recruited by clinical staff in each hospital. Caregivers were family members or friends who had provided informal care for the patient after their episode of severe sepsis. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Thirty-nine interviews were conducted with 22 patients and 17 informal caregivers (of these 28 were conducted face-to-face and 11 by telephone). Five main themes were identified in the qualitative analysis: awareness and knowledge of severe sepsis; experience of hospitalization, ongoing impact of severe sepsis; impact on caregivers; and support after severe sepsis. Experiences varied depending on the patients' health prior to the severe sepsis, with the worst affected reporting lasting impacts on multiple aspects of their life. CONCLUSIONS: The study extends what was understood about severe sepsis from the patients' and caregivers' perspectives from the previous limited literature. Caregivers as well as patients reported enduring impact. The study also identified problems of lack of awareness of diagnosis and understanding of severe sepsis by patients and caregivers and difficulties accessing appropriate healthcare providers and ancillary services after discharge from hospital.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,020 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».