Dataset Information

Barriers, enablers and initiatives for uptake of advance care planning in general practice: a systematic review and critical interpretive synthesis.

ABSTRACT:

Objectives

How advance care planning (ACP) is conceptualised in Australia including when, where and how ACP is best initiated, is unclear. It has been suggested that healthcare delivered in general practice provides an optimal setting for initiation of ACP discussions but uptake remains low. This systematic review and critical interpretive synthesis sought to answer two questions: (1) What are the barriers and enablers to uptake of ACP in general practice? (2) What initiatives have been used to increase uptake of ACP in general practice?

Design

A systematic review and critical interpretive synthesis of the peer-reviewed literature was undertaken. A socioecological framework was used to interpret and map the literature across four contextual levels of influence including individual, interpersonal, provider and system levels within a general practice setting.

Setting

Primary care general practice settings DATA SOURCES: Searches were undertaken from inception to July 2019 across Ovid Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Scopus, ProQuest and Cochrane Library of systematic reviews.

Results

The search yielded 4883 non-duplicate studies which were reduced to 54 studies for synthesis. Year of publication ranged from 1991 to 2019 and represented research from nine countries. Review findings identified a diverse and disaggregated body of ACP literature describing barriers and enablers to ACP in general practice, and interventions testing single or multiple mechanisms to improve ACP generally without explicit consideration for level of influence. There was a lack of cohesive guidance in shaping effective ACP interventions and some early indications of structured approaches emerging.

Conclusion

Findings from this review present an opportunity to strategically apply the ACP research evidence across targeted levels of influence, and with an understanding of mediators and moderators to inform the design of new and enhanced ACP models of care in general practice.

Prospero registration number

CRD42018088838.

SUBMITTER: Risk J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6756326 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Barriers, enablers and initiatives for uptake of advance care planning in general practice: a systematic review and critical interpretive synthesis.

Risk Jo J Mohammadi Leila L Rhee Joel J Walters Lucie L Ward Paul R PR

BMJ open 20190918 9

<h4>Objectives</h4>How advance care planning (ACP) is conceptualised in Australia including when, where and how ACP is best initiated, is unclear. It has been suggested that healthcare delivered in general practice provides an optimal setting for initiation of ACP discussions but uptake remains low. This systematic review and critical interpretive synthesis sought to answer two questions: (1) What are the barriers and enablers to uptake of ACP in general practice? (2) What initiatives have been ...[more]

PMID: 31537570

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundThe delivery of research in healthcare in the UK is dependent on a subgroup of clinicians - clinical academics - who concurrently engage in clinical practice and academic activities. The need to increase access to such roles for general practice nurses has been identified, although the need for a robust career framework remains.AimsThis study, with a qualitative interview and focus group design, aimed to explore the concept of clinical academic careers for general practice nurses by identifying barriers and enablers associated with pursuing and performing such roles.MethodsGeneral practice nurses (n = 18) and general practitioners (n = 5) engaged in either an audio -recorded interview or focus group. Verbatim transcripts were subjected to thematic analysis.ResultsFour themes were identified: awareness and understanding; career pathway; personal and professional attributes; and organisational factors. Awareness and understanding were generally poor. Participants suggested that the career pathway was unclear, although it was generally assumed that such roles were 'out of reach' and require a minimum of Master's level education. An interest in research and the confidence to perform such duties were reported as the required personal and professional attributes. Organisational factors included the need for employers to understand the value and benefit of general practice nurse clinical academic roles, along with ensuring that the inevitable competing demands of such a role were appropriately managed.ConclusionsThis study highlights the difficulties faced by general practice nurses wishing to pursue a clinical academic career. Academia is seemingly placed on a pedestal, emphasising the need to embed research training early in nursing education to alter general practice nurse perceptions that clinical academic roles are unobtainable. The development of a robust career pathway for general practice nurse clinical academic roles may have a positive impact on the retention of experienced general practice nurses and attract newly qualified nurses. This research provides evidence as to the need for one.

Project description:Kangaroo mother care (KMC) is an evidence-based approach to reducing mortality and morbidity in preterm infants. Although KMC is a key intervention package in newborn health initiatives, there is limited systematic information available on the barriers to KMC practice that mothers and other stakeholders face while practicing KMC. This systematic review sought to identify the most frequently reported barriers to KMC practice for mothers, fathers, and health practitioners, as well as the most frequently reported enablers to practice for mothers. We searched nine electronic databases and relevant reference lists for publications reporting barriers or enablers to KMC practice. We identified 1,264 unique publications, of which 103 were included based on pre-specified criteria. Publications were scanned for all barriers / enablers. Each publication was also categorized based on its approach to identification of barriers / enablers, and more weight was assigned to publications which had systematically sought to understand factors influencing KMC practice. Four of the top five ranked barriers to KMC practice for mothers were resource-related: "Issues with the facility environment / resources," "negative impressions of staff attitudes or interactions with staff," "lack of help with KMC practice or other obligations," and "low awareness of KMC / infant health." Considering only publications from low- and middle-income countries, "pain / fatigue" was ranked higher than when considering all publications. Top enablers to practice were included "mother-infant attachment" and "support from family, friends, and other mentors." Our findings suggest that mother can understand and enjoy KMC, and it has benefits for mothers, infants, and families. However, continuous KMC may be physically and emotionally difficult, and often requires support from family members, health practitioners, or other mothers. These findings can serve as a starting point for researchers and program implementers looking to improve KMC programs.

Project description:BackgroundAcademic institutions building capacity for implementation scholarship are also well positioned to build capacity in real world health and human service settings. How practitioners and policy makers are included and trained in implementation capacity-building initiatives, and their impact on building implementation practice capacity is unclear. This scoping review identified and examined features of interventions that build implementation practice capacity across researchers and practitioners or practitioners-in-training.MethodsFive bibliographic databases were searched. Eligible studies (a) described an implementation capacity building intervention with a connection to an academic institution, (b) targeted researchers and practitioners (including practitioners-in-training, students, or educators), and (c) reported intervention or participant outcomes. Articles that only described capacity building interventions without reporting outcomes were excluded. Consistent with Arksey and O'Malley's framework, key study characteristics were extracted (target participants, core components, and outcomes) and analyzed using open coding and numerical analysis.ResultsOf 1349 studies identified, 64 met eligibility for full-text review, and 14 were included in the final analysis. Half of the studies described implementation capacity building interventions that targeted health or behavioral health researchers, practitioners, and practitioners-in-training together, and half targeted practitioners or practitioners-in-training only. The most common components included structured didactic activities offered in person or online, mentorship and expert consultation to support implementation, and practical application activities (e.g., field placements, case studies). Knowledge sharing activities and technical assistance were less common. All studies reported favorable outcomes related to knowledge attainment, increased ability to implement evidence, productivity, and satisfaction.ConclusionsBuilding implementation capacity among practitioners is critical for integrating insights from implementation science into the field and preventing the "secondary" implementation research-to-practice gap. This scoping review identified several promising implementation practice capacity building interventions that tend to build practitioner capacity via expert led activities which may be relevant for academic institutions seeking to build implementation practice capacity. To avoid widening the implementation research-to-practice gap, implementation capacity building interventions are needed that target policy makers, expand beyond multiple practice settings, and leverage university/community partnerships or on-site academic medical centers. Future studies will also be needed to test the impact on service quality and public health outcomes.

Project description:ObjectivesInitiation of advance care planning (ACP) and palliative care (PC) assessments in general practice is key to quality end-of-life care. The Advance Project promotes a team-based approach to initiating ACP and PC needs assessment in general practices through training, resources and practical support for implementation from local primary health networks (PHNs). This paper aims to understand: (1) general practice participants' experiences of undertaking Advance Project training and implementing the Advance Project resources in their practices; (2) barriers and facilitators to implementation of Advance Project resources; and (3) PHN staff experiences of supporting general practices through training and practical support for implementation of the Advance Project resources.DesignQualitative study using semistructured interviews and thematic analysis.SettingTwenty-one general practices and four PHNs from three Australian states were recruited between June 2019 and May 2020.ParticipantsGeneral practitioners (GPs), general practice nurses, practice managers (PMs) and PHN staff.Results45 participants comprising 13 GPs, 13 general practice nurses, 9 PMs, 3 allied health staff and 7 PHN staff were interviewed. The general practice participants generally agreed that the Advance Project training/resources led to changes in their own behaviour and increased their awareness of the importance of ACP/PC discussion with their patients. Participants reported the following benefits for patients: increased awareness of ACP; engagement with families/carers and peace of mind. Key facilitators for successful implementation were a team-based approach, the role of the PHN, the role of practice champions, training facilitators' ability to influence peers and facilitate change, and mentoring support. Barriers to implementation included issues related to workplace culture, cost, time/workload, patients and health system.ConclusionFindings suggest that the Advance Project approach facilitated successful implementation of ACP and PC needs assessment into usual care in general practices that encouraged teamwork among GPs and general practice nurses. The ability of the practice to make the best use of practical support and guidance available to them through their local PHN both before and during implementation was a key factor in integration of Advance Project resources into routine practice.

Dataset Information

Barriers, enablers and initiatives for uptake of advance care planning in general practice: a systematic review and critical interpretive synthesis.

Objectives

Design

Setting

Results

Conclusion

Prospero registration number

Publications

Barriers, enablers and initiatives for uptake of advance care planning in general practice: a systematic review and critical interpretive synthesis.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets