Abstract：
OBJECTIVE: The prevalence and mortality of chronic liver disease has risen significantly. In end stage liver disease (ESLD) the survival of patients is approximately 2 years. Despite the poor prognosis and high symptom burden of these patients, integration of palliative care is reduced. We aim to analyze the agreement between palliative care and hepatology physicians of clinical scenarios that could require palliative care intervention.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted. Palliative care and hepatology physicians were surveyed. Using a five-point Likert scale, their perceptions of palliative care in ESLD were rated. Their agreement in clinical scenarios that could require palliative care intervention were evaluated. Analyses were conducted to assess any differences by primary role (hepatology vs. palliative care) and length of practice (<10 years vs. 10 years).
RESULTS: A total of 123 responses were obtained: 52% from palliative care and 48% from hepatology. The majority (66.7%) work in the field for up to ten years. There was a great consensus in 4 of the 8 clinical scenarios. In scenarios with less consensus, the area of activity and length of practice influence the reliance of physicians on palliative care. Involvement of palliative care in ESLD was considered \"rare\" by 30% and 61% consider difficult to predict the prognosis. More than 90% support medical training in both areas of activity.
CONCLUSIONS: The current involvement of palliative care is considered low, but there are clinical conditions that reveal a clear consensus and there\'s a unanimous view of the relevance of training.
METHODS: A cross-sectional study was conducted. Palliative care and hepatology physicians were surveyed. Using a five-point Likert scale, their perceptions of palliative care in ESLD were rated. Their agreement in clinical scenarios that could require palliative care intervention were evaluated. Analyses were conducted to assess any differences by primary role (hepatology vs. palliative care) and length of practice (<10 years vs. 10 years).
RESULTS: A total of 123 responses were obtained: 52% from palliative care and 48% from hepatology. The majority (66.7%) work in the field for up to ten years. There was a great consensus in 4 of the 8 clinical scenarios. In scenarios with less consensus, the area of activity and length of practice influence the reliance of physicians on palliative care. Involvement of palliative care in ESLD was considered \"rare\" by 30% and 61% consider difficult to predict the prognosis. More than 90% support medical training in both areas of activity.
CONCLUSIONS: The current involvement of palliative care is considered low, but there are clinical conditions that reveal a clear consensus and there\'s a unanimous view of the relevance of training.
摘要：
目的：慢性肝病的患病率和病死率明显上升。在终末期肝病（ESLD）中，患者的生存期约为2年。尽管这些患者预后差，症状负担高，姑息治疗的整合减少。我们的目标是分析可能需要姑息治疗干预的临床方案的姑息治疗和肝病医生之间的协议。
方法：进行横断面研究。对姑息治疗和肝病医生进行了调查。用李克特五点量表，对他们对ELD姑息治疗的看法进行了评级。评估了他们在可能需要姑息治疗干预的临床方案中的一致性。进行分析以评估主要角色的任何差异(肝病与姑息治疗)和实践时间(<10年vs.10年）。
结果：总共获得了123个响应：52％来自姑息治疗，48％来自肝病学。大多数（66.7％）在该领域工作长达十年。在8种临床方案中的4种方案中，有很大的共识。在共识较少的情况下，活动区域和执业时间会影响医生对姑息治疗的依赖。30％的人认为姑息治疗在ESLD中的参与“罕见”，61％的人认为难以预测预后。超过90％的人支持这两个活动领域的医疗培训。
结论：目前姑息治疗的参与程度较低，但有临床条件，揭示了一个明确的共识，并有一个一致的看法的相关性的培训。
方法：进行横断面研究。对姑息治疗和肝病医生进行了调查。用李克特五点量表，对他们对ELD姑息治疗的看法进行了评级。评估了他们在可能需要姑息治疗干预的临床方案中的一致性。进行分析以评估主要角色的任何差异(肝病与姑息治疗)和实践时间(<10年vs.10年）。
结果：总共获得了123个响应：52％来自姑息治疗，48％来自肝病学。大多数（66.7％）在该领域工作长达十年。在8种临床方案中的4种方案中，有很大的共识。在共识较少的情况下，活动区域和执业时间会影响医生对姑息治疗的依赖。30％的人认为姑息治疗在ESLD中的参与“罕见”，61％的人认为难以预测预后。超过90％的人支持这两个活动领域的医疗培训。
结论：目前姑息治疗的参与程度较低，但有临床条件，揭示了一个明确的共识，并有一个一致的看法的相关性的培训。
