4.3 Review

Measuring and communicating meaningful outcomes in neonatology: A family perspective

期刊

SEMINARS IN PERINATOLOGY
卷 40, 期 8, 页码 571-577

出版社

W B SAUNDERS CO-ELSEVIER INC
DOI: 10.1053/j.semperi.2016.09.009

关键词

Extreme prematurity; Congenital anomalies; Neonatal intensive care unit; Life-sustaining interventions; End-of-life decisions; Disability; Screening; Palliative care; Family-centered care; Communication; Empathy

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Medium- and long-term outcomes have been collected and described among survivors of neonatal intensive care units for decades, for a number of purposes: (1) quality control within units, (2) comparisons of outcomes between NICUs, (3) clinical trials (whether an intervention improves outcomes), (4) end-of-life decision-making, (5) to better understand the effects of neonatal conditions and/or interventions on organs and/or long-term health, and finally (6) to better prepare parents for the future. However, the outcomes evaluated have been selected by investigators, based on feasibility, availability, cost, stability, and on what investigators consider to be important. Many of the routinely measured outcomes have major limitations: they may not correlate well with long-term difficulties, they may artificially divide continuous outcomes into dichotomous ones, and may have no clear relationship with quality of life and functioning of children and their families. Several investigations, such as routine term cerebral resonance imaging for preterm infants, have also not yet been shown to improve the outcome of children nor their families. In this article, the most common variables used in neonatology as well as some variables which are rarely measured but may be of equal importance for families are presented. The manner in which these outcomes are communicated to families will be examined, as well as recommendations to optimize communication with parents. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据