Role of Respite Palliative Care in Understanding and Managing Complex Palliative Care Situation – A Case Report
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Introduction: The concept of total pain encompasses a person's physical, psychological, social, spiritual, and practical struggles. Effective pain and symptom management are the core elements of palliative care which aims at reducing suffering and improving quality of life (QOL) throughout the course of illness and need to be addressed with multidisciplinary coordinated approach in a timely manner. It may be challenging for palliative care providers to address all these distressing issues during short out-patient consultations. Hence, Respite Palliative Care Unit (RPCU) is an appropriate place to provide holistic patient care. Case Description: A 59-year-old widow, from Muslim community, was following up with Palliative Medicine out-patient department for management of progressively increasing chest pain with frequent exacerbations. She remained unsatisfied with the pain management and reported moderate to severe intensity of pain despite maximal pain management using multimodal approaches. We planned to systematically explore and address the issues leading to uncontrolled pain and distress. The patient was admitted to RPCU for holistic pain management and continuity of care. We explored and addressed the complex psycho-socio-spiritual aspects contributing to the total pain experience to achieve better symptom control and improve her overall well-being. Conclusion: This case report emphasizes the role of RPCU in effective and holistic management of psychosocial, spiritual issues, difficult communication, and advanced care planning. This model of palliative care can be a valuable addition to various health-care set-ups in the developing countries for improvement of patient care.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.004 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.005 | 0.005 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".