Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a paediatric palliative care team.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Over the last decade, paediatric palliative care teams (PPCTs) have been introduced to support children with life-limiting diseases and their families and to ensure continuity, coordination and quality of paediatric palliative care (PPC). However, implementing a PPCT into an organisation is a challenge. The objective of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators reported by healthcare professionals (HCPs) in primary, secondary or tertiary care for implementing a newly initiated multidisciplinary PPCT to bridge the gap between hospital and home.The Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations (MIDI) was used to assess responses of 71 HCPs providing PPC to one or more of the 129 children included in a pilot study of a PPCT based at a university children's hospital. The MIDI (29 items) assessed barriers and facilitators to implementing the PPCT by using a 5-point scale (completely disagree to completely agree) and additional open-ended questions. Items to which ?20% of participants responded with 'totally disagree/disagree' and ?80% responded with 'agree/totally agree' were considered as barriers and facilitators, respectively. A general inductive approach was used for open-ended questions.Reported barriers to implementing a PPCT were related to the HCP's own organisation (e.g., no working arrangements related to use of the intervention [PPCT] registered, other organisational changes such as merger going on). Reported facilitators were mainly related to the intervention (correctness, simplicity, observability and relevancy) and the user scale (positive outcome expectations, patient satisfaction) and only once to the organisation scale (information accessibility). Additionally, HCPs expressed the need for clarity about tasks of the PPCT and reported having made a transition from feeling threatened by the PPCT to satisfaction about the PPCT.Positive experiences with the PPCT are a major facilitator for implementing a PPCT. Tailored organisational strategies such as working arrangements by management, concrete information about the PPCT itself and the type of support provided by the PPCT should be clearly communicated to involved HCPs to increase awareness about benefits of the PPCT and ensure a successful implementation. New PPCTs need protection and resources in their initial year to develop into experienced and qualified PPCTs.
<h4>Background</h4>Over the last decade, paediatric palliative care teams (PPCTs) have been introduced to support children with life-limiting diseases and their families and to ensure continuity, coordination and quality of paediatric palliative care (PPC). However, implementing a PPCT into an organisation is a challenge. The objective of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators reported by healthcare professionals (HCPs) in primary, secondary or tertiary care for implementing a newl ...[more]
Project description:Neonatal nurses in mainland China encounter various challenges when it comes to delivering palliative care to neonates. The aim of this study was to determine the barriers and facilitators of neonatal nurses' attitudes to palliative care for neonates in mainland China. A simplified Chinese version of the Neonatal Palliative Care Attitude Scale was piloted, administered, and analyzed using survey methods. Nurses in neonatal intensive care units in mainland China regardless of experience in the field were invited to take part in. Over a five-month period in 2019, we surveyed neonatal nurses from 40 hospitals in five provinces of China. The response rate was 92.5% (N = 550). This study identified eight facilitators and four barriers to neonatal palliative care implementation. In terms of nurses' attitudes on providing palliative care, younger and older nurses were more positive, whereas middle-aged nurses were less so. Nurses' emotional wellbeing was rarely impacted by neonatal death. They considered neonatal palliative care, particularly pain management, to be just as important as curative treatment. Parents were invited to participate in decision-making by nurses. Nurses reported having access to professional counseling and talking about their concerns with other healthcare professionals. The following barriers to neonatal palliative care were identified in this study that were not observed in the original English version scale research in 2009: a lack of clinicians, time, clinical skills, systematic education, neonatal palliative care experience, and social acceptance. Future research is required to investigate each barrier in order to improve the implementation of neonatal palliative care in mainland China.
Project description:ObjectiveThe aim of this qualitative study was to use a theory-based approach to understand the facilitators and barriers that impacted the implementation of the Primary Care Asthma Paediatric Pathway.DesignQualitative semistructured focus groups following a randomised cluster-controlled design.Setting22 primary care practices in Alberta, Canada.Participants37 healthcare providers participated in four focus groups to discuss the barriers and facilitators of pathway implementation.InterventionAn electronic medical record (EMR) based paediatric asthma pathway, online learning modules, in-person training for allied health teams in asthma education, and a clinical dashboard for patient management.Main outcome measuresOur qualitative findings are organised into three themes using the core constructs of the normalisation process theory: (1) Facilitators of implementation, (2) Barriers to implementation, and (3) Proposed mitigation strategies.ResultsParticipants were positive about the pathway, and felt it served as a reminder of paediatric guideline-based asthma management, and an EMR-based targeted collection of tools and resources. Barriers included a low priority of paediatric asthma due to few children with asthma in their practices. The pathway was not integrated into clinic flow and there was not a specific process to ensure the pathway was used. Sites without project champions also struggled more with implementation. Despite these barriers, clinicians identified mitigation strategies to improve uptake including developing a reminder system within the EMR and creating a workflow that incorporated the pathway.ConclusionThis study demonstrated the barriers and facilitators shaping the asthma pathway implementation. Our findings highlighted that if team support of enrolment (establishing buy-in), legitimisation (ensuring teams see their role in the pathway) and activation (an ongoing plan for sustainability) there may have been greater uptake of the pathway.Trial registration numberThis study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov on 25 June 2015; the registration number is: NCT02481037, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02481037?term=andrew+cave&cond=Asthma+in+Children&cntry=CA&city=Edmonton&draw=2&rank=1.
Project description:BackgroundTelehealth is increasingly used in palliative care and its application is seen as one possible solution to improve access to palliative care services, thereby providing additional support for patients with advanced cancer. By completing a systematic review of the literature this research identifies the barriers and facilitators of telehealth adoption by patients with advanced cancer to determine the type of healthcare services needed to meet their needs.MethodsA systematic review of the literature was conducted on CINAHL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, PsycArticles, the Cochrane Library, Scopus, Web of Science, ScienceDirect, IEEE Xplore as well as grey literature to identify the barriers and facilitators of adopting telehealth by patients with advanced cancer in palliative care. The search was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42023446460) and focused on articles published between March 2021 and August 2023, after the first wave of COVID-19.ResultsOverall, nine papers were identified and included in the review. Patients with advanced cancer were found to be willing to use telehealth reporting a high satisfaction. Patients with advanced cancer receiving palliative care experienced barriers such as software and hardware failures as well as technical issues. Complicating this even further was a language barrier, as well as aging and medical issues. Older patients found the use of telehealth difficult and reported needing additional support around its use, yet telehealth was broadly found to be accepted. Telehealth facilitated a sense of independence, control, comfort and security to patients. Operating in the background while remaining available it promoted a sense of empowerment for patients.ConclusionsIdentification of the barriers and facilitators of telehealth use by patients with advanced cancer in palliative care, contributes to condition specific benchmarks for telehealth use and further informs national treatment guidelines around patients with advanced cancer needs to ensure sustainability and relevance now and in the future.
Project description:BackgroundDigital health technologies such as sensor systems are intended to support healthcare staff in providing adequate patient care. In the Department of Palliative Medicine (University Medical Center Freiburg), we developed and implemented a noninvasive, bed-based sensor system in a pilot study. The aim was to detect distress in patients who were no longer able to express themselves by monitoring heart and respiratory rates, vocalizations, and movement measurements. The sensor system was intended to supplement standard care, which generally cannot guarantee constant monitoring. As there is a lack of data on how healthcare professionals experience such a techno-digital innovation, the aim of this study was to explore how the multiprofessional palliative care team who piloted the sensor system perceived its potential benefits and limitations, and how they experienced the broader context of healthcare technology and research in palliative care.MethodsWe conducted a qualitative interview study with 20 members of the palliative care team and analyzed the recorded, verbatim transcribed interviews using qualitative content analysis.ResultsThe sensor system was described as easy to use and as helpful support for patients, care staff, and relatives, especially against the backdrop of demographic change. However, it could not replace human interpretation of stress and subsequent treatment decisions: this remained the expertise of the nursing staff. A potential reduction in personnel was expected to be a risk of a digital monitoring system. The special conditions of research and digital health technologies in an end-of-life context also became clear. Specifically, healthcare staff were open to health technologies if they benefited the patient and were compatible with professional nursing and/or palliative care attitudes. Additionally, a patient-protective attitude and possible interprofessional differences in priorities and the resulting challenges for the team became apparent.ConclusionsA potential digital solution for distress monitoring was considered useful by palliative care practitioners. However, interprofessional differences and compatibility with existing palliative care practices need to be considered before implementing such a system. To increase user acceptability, the perspectives of healthcare professionals should be included in the implementation of technological innovations in palliative care.
Project description:Palliative care has potential to improve quality of life and goal-concordant care for patients with adult congenital heart disease (ACHD). However, it is rarely employed prior to critical illness because the best methods for implementation are not well-defined. We qualitatively evaluated ACHD patients' understanding of and opinions regarding palliative care and advance care planning (ACP) to better define the needs of this population. We conducted a thematic analysis of 25 semistructured interviews with patients with ACHD in which we assessed participants' perspectives on the need for, and barriers and facilitators to, the use of palliative care and ACP. In a group of participants with ACHD (mean age 38, 48% male) classified as simple (24%), moderate (32%), or complex (44%), we identified 4 major themes: (1) using knowledge to combat future uncertainties; (2) unfamiliarity with and limited exposure to palliative care and ACP; (3) facilitators and barriers to engaging in palliative care and ACP; and (4) importance of timing and presentation of ACP discussions. In conclusion, participants expressed a desire for knowledge about ACHD progression and treatment. They supported routine incorporation of palliative care and ACP and identified related facilitators and barriers to doing so. Importantly, timing and format of these discussions must be individualized using shared decision-making between clinicians, patients, and their families.
Project description:BackgroundHomeless people often suffer from complex and chronic comorbidities, have high rates of morbidity and die at much younger ages than the general population. Due to a complex combination of physical, psychosocial and addiction problems at the end of life, they often have limited access to palliative care. Both the homeless and healthcare providers experience a lot of barriers. Therefore, providing palliative care that fits the needs and concerns of the homeless is a challenge to healthcare providers. This systematic review aims to summarize evidence about the concerns, palliative care needs and preferences of homeless people, as well as barriers and facilitators for delivering high quality palliative care.MethodsPubMed, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science were searched up to 10 May 2016. Included were studies about homeless people with a short life expectancy, their palliative care needs and the palliative care provided, that were conducted in Western countries. Data were independently extracted by two researchers using a predefined extraction form. Quality was assessed using a Critical Appraisal instrument. The systematic literature review was based on the PRISMA statement.ResultsTwenty-seven publications from 23 different studies met the inclusion criteria; 15 studies were qualitative and eight were quantitative. Concerns of the homeless often related to end-of-life care not being a priority, drug dependence hindering adequate care, limited insight into their condition and little support from family and relatives. Barriers and facilitators often concerned the attitude of healthcare professionals towards homeless people. A respectful approach and respect for dignity proved to be important in good quality palliative care.ConclusionsA patient-centred, flexible and low-threshold approach embodying awareness of the concerns of homeless people is needed so that appropriate palliative care can be provided timely. Training, education and experience of professionals can help to accomplish this.
Project description:IntroductionPaediatric palliative care (PPC) is care for children with life-threatening or life-limiting conditions, and can involve complex high-tech care, which can last for months or years. In 2015, the National Individual Care Plan (ICP) for PPC was developed and has shown to be successful. The ICP can be seen as an instrument to facilitate coordination, quality and continuity of PPC. However, in practice, an ICP is often completed too late and for too few children. We aim to improve the coordination, quality and continuity of care for every child with a life-threatening or life-limiting condition and his/her family by further developing and implementing the ICP in the Netherlands.Methods and analysisTo evaluate the original ICP, ICP 1.0, interviews and questionnaires will be held among parents of children who have or have had an ICP 1.0 and healthcare professionals (HCPs) who used ICP 1.0. Based on the results, ICP 1.0 will be further developed. An implementation strategy will be written and the renewed ICP, ICP 2.0, will be nationally tested in an implementation period of approximately 7 months. During the implementation period, ICP 2.0 will be used for all children who are registered with Children's Palliative Care teams. After the implementation period, ICP 2.0 will be evaluated using interviews and questionnaires among parents of children who received ICP 2.0 and HPCs who worked with ICP 2.0. Based on these results, ICP 2.0 will be further optimised into the final version: ICP 3.0.Ethics and disseminationThis study received ethical approval. The ICP 3.0 will be disseminated through the Dutch Centre of Expertise in Children's Palliative Care, to ensure wide availability for the general public and HCPs within PPC. Additionally, we aim to publish study results in open-access, peer-reviewed journals and to present results at national and international scientific meetings.
Project description:PurposeTo assess health care professionals' perceptions of barriers to the utilization of breast cancer risk assessment tools in the public health setting through a series of one-on-one interviews with health care team members.MethodsWe conducted a cross-sectional qualitative study consisting of one-on-one semistructured telephone interviews with health care team members in the public health setting in the state of Tennessee between May 2020 and October 2020. An iterative inductive-deductive approach was used for qualitative analysis of interview data, resulting in the development of a conceptual framework to depict influences of provider behavior in the utilization of breast cancer risk assessment.ResultsA total of 24 interviews were completed, and a framework of influences of provider behavior in the utilization of breast cancer risk assessment was developed. Participants identified barriers to the utilization of breast cancer risk assessment (knowledge and understanding of risk assessment tools, workflow challenges, and availability of personnel); patient-level barriers as perceived by health care team members (psychological, economic, educational, and environmental); and strategies to increase the utilization of breast cancer risk assessment at the provider level (leadership buy-in, training, supportive policies, and incentives) and patient level (improved communication and better understanding of patients' perceived cancer risk and severity of cancer).ConclusionsUnderstanding barriers to implementation of breast cancer risk assessment and strategies to overcome these barriers as perceived by health care team members offers an opportunity to improve implementation of risk assessment and to identify a racially, geographically, and socioeconomically diverse population of young women at high risk for breast cancer.
Project description:BackgroundPediatric patients experience significant symptoms during cancer treatment. Symptom management is frequently inadequate. We studied perceptions of pediatric oncology care providers regarding early integration of palliative care (PC) for pediatric patients to identify barriers and facilitators that might assist in understanding how care could be improved.ProceduresPediatric oncology providers were recruited to participate in four focus groups. A proposal for early integration of a pediatric palliative care team (PPCT) was presented and followed by a facilitated discussion. Data were analytically categorized into themes by three independent coders using constant comparative analysis and crystallization techniques. A consensus approach was used to identify final themes.ResultsBarriers to the proposed care model of early integration of a PPCT included provider role, conflicting philosophy, patient readiness, and emotional influence and were more prevalent in the physician participants compared to nurse practitioner, nursing, and social work participants. Facilitators included patient eligibility, improved patient care, education, and evidence-based medicine. Though all participants were invested in providing optimal patient care, physician participants believed the current standard of care model is meeting the needs of patients and family, while the nurse practitioner, nursing, and social work participants working on the same healthcare team believed the proposed care model would improve the overall care of children diagnosed with cancer.ConclusionsDiffering perceptions among healthcare providers regarding the care of children with cancer suggest that team functioning could be improved. Avenues for pilot testing early integration of PC could provide useful information for a next study.
Project description:BackgroundRobots in healthcare are gaining increasing attention; however, their implementation is challenging due to the complexity of both interventions themselves and the contexts in which they are implemented. The objective of this integrative review is to identify barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of robotic systems in nursing.MethodsArticles published from 2002 to 2019 reporting on projects to implement robotic devices in nursing care were searched on Medline (via PubMed), CINAHL and databases on funded research projects (Community Research and Development Information Services and Technische Informationsbibliothek) and in journals for robotic research in November 2017 and July 2019 for an update. No restrictions regarding study designs were imposed. All included articles underwent quality assessments with design-specific critical appraisal tools. Barriers to and facilitators of implementation were classified using the Context and Implementation of Complex Interventions framework.ResultsAfter removing all duplicates, the search revealed 11 204 studies, of which 17 met the inclusion criteria and were included in the synthesis. The majority of the studies dealt with the implementation of robots designed to support individuals, either living at home or in nursing homes (n=11). The studies were conducted in Europe, the USA and New Zealand and were carried out in nursing homes, individual living environments, hospital units and laboratories. The quality of reporting and quality of evidence were low in most studies. The most frequently reported barriers were in socioeconomic and ethical domains and were within the implementation outcomes domain. The most frequently reported facilitators were related to the sociocultural context, implementation process and implementation strategies.DiscussionThis review identified barriers to and facilitators of the implementation of robotic devices in nursing within different dimensions. The results serve as a basis for the development of suitable implementation strategies to reduce potential barriers and promote the integration of elements to facilitate implementation.Prospero registration numberCRD42018073486.
