Nursing care to patients who have the home as the preferred place of death: a scoping review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: The existing literature on nursing care for patients who choose home as their preferred place of death is scattered and lacks a coherent overview. This scoping review aimed to explore and categorize the available evidence on how nurses provide care for patients preferring to die at home. METHODS: Studies that included nurses and were focused on nursing care for patients who choose the home as their preferred place of death were included in the review. The scoping review considered studies with quantitative, qualitative, or mixed method designs; systematic reviews; and meta-analyses. No time restrictions were added. Key information sources were Medline, CINAHL (EBSCO), Scopus (Elsevier) and Google Scholar. Systematic reviews were searched for in the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. Unpublished studies and grey literature were searched for in ProQuest Dissertations and Theses. The reference list of the studies included was searched. RESULTS: A total of 13 studies were deemed eligible for inclusion in the review, of which (n = 11) were qualitative and (n = 2) were both qualitative and quantitative. The studies were published between 2008 and 2023 and were conducted in the United Kingdom (n = 5), Norway (n = 4), Australia, Sweden, Canada and Japan. The studies included in this review highlighted issues of competence, resource limitations, flexibility as a coping mechanism, as well as collaboration and family caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: This review identified significant challenges in delivering nursing care for patients who prefer to die at home, including staff shortages, resource limitations, and educational deficiencies. Despite these barriers, nurses showed a strong commitment to patient care, highlighting the need for increased support and collaboration with family caregivers to improve home-based end-of-life care. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: To improve care for patients who wish to die at home, it is crucial to address staff shortages and enhance nurse training to close knowledge gaps and ensure consistent, high-quality care. Healthcare systems must also allocate adequate resources to ensure that nurses have the necessary tools to deliver safe and effective care in home settings. Strengthening interdisciplinary collaboration will further enhance patient outcomes by supporting both nurses and family caregivers in end-of-life care.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,022 | 0,091 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,005 | 0,005 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,021 | 0,018 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Communication savante | 0,006 | 0,005 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,004 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,004 | 0,003 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,004 | 0,001 |
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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».