The clinical effect evaluation of multidisciplinary collaborative team combined with palliative care model in patients with terminal cancer: a randomised controlled study

To evaluate the clinical effect of a multidisciplinary collaboration team combined with a palliative care model in patients with terminal cancer. A total of 84 patients diagnosed with terminal cancer in our hospital were included and randomly divided into an intervention group and a control group, w...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:BMC palliative care 2023-06, Vol.22 (1), p.71-71, Article 71
Hauptverfasser: Liu, Yu-Jing, Wu, Li-Ping, Wang, Hong, Han, Qing, Wang, Shu-Na, Zhang, Jing
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:To evaluate the clinical effect of a multidisciplinary collaboration team combined with a palliative care model in patients with terminal cancer. A total of 84 patients diagnosed with terminal cancer in our hospital were included and randomly divided into an intervention group and a control group, with 42 cases in each group. Patients in the intervention group were treated by a multidisciplinary collaborative team combined with the palliative care model, and patients in the control group were treated by routine nursing intervention. The Self-rating Anxiety Scale (SAS) and the Self-rating Depression Scale (SDS) were used to evaluate negative emotions and anxiety and depression of patients before and after intervention. The Quality of Life Scale (European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] QLQ-C30) and Social Support Scale (SSRS) were used to evaluate the quality of life and social support of patients. This study has been registered in 13/01/2023 (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT05683236). The general data of the two groups were comparable. After intervention, the SAS (43.7 ± 7.4 vs. 54.2 ± 9.3) and SDS scores (38.4 ± 6.5 vs. 53.1 ± 8.4) of the intervention group were significantly lower than those of the control group. The total SSRS score, subjective support score, objective support score and utilisation of support of the intervention group were significantly higher than those of the control group (P 
ISSN:1472-684X
1472-684X
DOI:10.1186/s12904-023-01192-7