Search Results Heading

MBRLSearchResults

mbrl.module.common.modules.added.book.to.shelf
Title added to your shelf!
View what I already have on My Shelf.
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to add the title to your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
Are you sure you want to remove the book from the shelf?
Oops! Something went wrong.
Oops! Something went wrong.
While trying to remove the title from your shelf something went wrong :( Kindly try again later!
    Done
    Filters
    Reset
  • Is Peer Reviewed
      Is Peer Reviewed
      Clear All
      Is Peer Reviewed
  • Item Type
      Item Type
      Clear All
      Item Type
  • Subject
      Subject
      Clear All
      Subject
  • Source
      Source
      Clear All
      Source
  • Year
      Year
      Clear All
      From:
      -
      To:
  • More Filters
1 result(s) for "Orlandini, Fiorenzo"
Sort by:
Misurare la complessità e il bisogno di cure palliative specialistiche al domicilio del paziente oncologico in fase avanzata di malattia. Primo step di validazione di un questionario in lingua italiana
The allocation to general vs specialist palliative home care services is decided by theHome Palliative Care Unit (HPCU). The HPCU needs validated tools analyzing and stratifying the complexity and supporting good partnership working between Generalist and Specialist PCT. Methods. In order to define factors supporting the choice of Generalist versus Specialist PCT, Experts of Palliative Care Service of Emilia Romagna Region (Italy) according to Regional Health Policies Group defined a new tool to identify palliative care patient’s and family’s needs. We created a screening tool identifying terminally ill cancer metastatic patients in need of referral to a PC Generalist or Specialist PC at home than we performed a prospective, observational, no profit, multicenter study to testing it. The questionnaire compiled by the HPCU team to describe what it detected at home was reviewed by a second team (Comparison Team 2) to assess the convergent validity and inter-observer reproducibility. Results. There were 119 patients who could be evaluated. The dimensions investigated by the instrument that were most relevant in the assignment of the specialist care level were: presence of an evolutionary-unstable clinical picture, finding of limited therapeutic options for symptom control, presence of dyspnea. The convergent validity was moderate in this first phase of the study (Cohen’s Kappa 0.49); the inter-observer reproducibility in Team 2 was excellent (Cohen’s Kappa 0.94). Conclusions. The tool proved to be an easy and quick to use tool. The results of the first step are encouraging and guide the new research protocol as part of the Emilia-Romagna Year 2020 Health Research Program aimed at retesting the modified tool in the formulation of the questions, calibrated based on the results of the study.