Search

Your search keyword '"Bausewein C"' showing total 622 results
Start Over Author "Bausewein C"
622 results on '"Bausewein C"'

208. Das BMBF-Projekt „PAALiativ“– Intelligente technische Unterstützungsmöglichkeiten in der häuslichen Versorgung für Menschen im letzten Lebensjahr

Author

Scheve, C, primary, Hein, A, additional, Jessen, M, additional, Jüptner, A, additional, Meyer, J, additional, Kluthe, R, additional, Otremba, B, additional, Prenzel, R, additional, Reichert, D, additional, Schwarz-Eywill, M, additional, Bausewein, C, additional, and Simon, ST, additional

Published
2010
Full Text
View/download PDF

221. Palliativmedizin in der Pneumologie

Author

Magnussen, H., primary, Heigener, D., additional, Bausewein, C., additional, Thomas, M., additional, Eschbach, C., additional, Schütte, W., additional, Blankenburg, T., additional, Steins, M., additional, Bischoff, H., additional, Schucher, B., additional, Rosseau, S., additional, Schütz, A., additional, Geiseler, J., additional, Kampf, S., additional, and Karg, O., additional

Published
2009
Full Text
View/download PDF

236. Einsatz von Antibiotika in der Palliativmedizin

Author

Pestinger, M, primary, Müller, A, additional, Ostgathe, C, additional, Bausewein, C, additional, Strohscheer, I, additional, Etspüler, W, additional, Schulzeck, S, additional, Elsner, F, additional, and Radbruch, L, additional

Published
2006
Full Text
View/download PDF

248. If you had less than a year to live, would you want to know? A seven-country European population survey of public preferences for disclosure of poor prognosis.

Author

Harding, R., Simms, V., Calanzani, N., Higginson, I. J., Hall, S., Gysels, M., Meñaca, A., Bausewein, C., Deliens, L., Ferreira, P., Toscani, F., Daveson, B. A., Ceulemans, L., and Gomes, B.

Subjects
CANCER prognosis, TERMINALLY ill, MORTALITY, CLINICAL medicine, CLINICAL pharmacology, MEDICAL informatics
Abstract

Objective With increasing European cancer deaths, clinicians must manage information regarding poor prognosis. This study aimed to determine European citizens' preferences, within a scenario of serious illness such as cancer with less than a year to live, for information disclosure regarding poor prognosis, the likely symptoms and problems, and the care options available, to measure variations between countries and to identify factors associated with preferences. Methods A population-based cross-national telephone survey using random digit dialling in seven countries was conducted. Results Among 9344 respondents, data revealed an international preference (73.9%) to always be informed in the scenario of having a serious illness such as cancer with less than a year to live. This varied from 67.6% in Italy to 80.7% in Flanders. A minority (21.1%) did not want such information unless they ask, or at all. People younger than 70 years (OR 0.72, 95% CI 0.62-0.83, p < 0.001), men (OR 1.23, 95% CI 1.10-1.37, p < 0.001), those with experience of illness (OR = 1.20. 95% CI 1.01-1.43, p < 0.05) and with more education (OR = 1.20, 95% CI 1.09-1.32, p < 0.001) were more likely to want to know of limited time left. Conclusions The models confirmed the influence of four factors in more than one country (age, gender, education and most concerning problem) and added 11 country-specific factors to which national policies and clinical practice should respond. These findings confirm a majority public preference to be informed in a scenario of poor prognosis. Policy clinical practice should facilitate elucidation and delivery of preferences. Evidence for effective communication skills-building interventions for clinicians is required. Copyright © 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2013
Full Text
View/download PDF

249. Medikamentöse Therapie der refraktären Atemnot.

Author

Simon, S.T., Köskeroglu, P., and Bausewein, C.

Abstract

Copyright of Der Schmerz is the property of Springer Nature and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

Published
2012
Full Text
View/download PDF

250. Republished: which questions of two commonly used multidimensional palliative care patient reported outcome measures are most useful? Results from the European and African PRISMA survey.

Author

Higginson IJ, Simon ST, Benalia H, Downing J, Daveson BA, Harding R, Bausewein C, and PRISMA

Abstract

AIM: To evaluate the views of clinicians and researchers on their use of outcome measures and which questions are most important in palliative and end-of-life care. METHODS: Online survey of professionals working in clinical care, clinical audit and research in palliative care across Europe and Africa identified through national and international associations and databases. Questions focused on measures used, reasons and which questions were important in two commonly used multidimensional measures, the Palliative care Outcome Scale (POS) and the Support Team Assessment Schedule (STAS). RESULTS: The overall completion rate was 59% (392/663). Three outcome measures were commonly used by over one in four respondents for clinical practice and over one in 10 for research: the Karnofsky Performance Scale (KPS), followed by the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (ESAS) and the POS. Measures were used twice as often in clinical practice as in research. The main uses were similar: assessing patients' symptoms/needs (88% and 85% of POS and STAS users, respectively), monitoring changes (62%, 58%), evaluating care (61%, 48%) and assessing family needs (59%, 60%). Respondents rated the most important questions as pain, symptoms, emotional and family aspects. There were no differences in the choice of the most important questions between doctors and nurses or between researchers and clinicians. CONCLUSIONS: In palliative care, outcome measures often used in clinical practice are also often used in research. Questions relating to pain, symptoms, emotional needs and family concerns are consistently considered the most useful and important in palliative patient reported outcome measures (PROMs). [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Published
2012

Catalog

Books, media, physical & digital resources
See catalog results