Early palliative home care: Evaluation of an interprofessional educational intervention for district nurses and general practitioners about nutritional care.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Berggren E
PROVIDER: S-EPMC5564855 | biostudies-other | 2017
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-other
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundGeneralists such as general practitioners and district nurses have been the main actors in community palliative care in Norway. Specialised oncology nurses with postgraduate palliative training are increasingly becoming involved. There is little research on their contribution. This study explores how general practitioners (GPs) and oncology nurses (ONs) experience their collaboration in primary palliative care.MethodsA qualitative focus group and interview study in rural Northern Norway, involving 52 health professionals. Five uni-professional focus group discussions were followed by five interprofessional discussions and six individual interviews. Transcripts were analysed thematically.ResultsThe ideal cooperation between GPs and ONs was as a "meeting of experts" with complementary competencies. GPs drew on their generalist backgrounds, including their often long-term relationship with and knowledge of the patient. The ONs contributed longitudinal clinical observations and used their specialised knowledge to make treatment suggestions. While ONs were often experienced and many had developed a form of pattern recognition, they needed GPs' competencies for complex clinical judgements. However, ONs sometimes lacked timely advice from GPs, and could feel left alone with sick patients. To avoid this, some ONs bypassed GPs and contacted palliative specialists directly. While traditional professional hierarchies were not a barrier, we found that organization, funding and remuneration were significant barriers to cooperation. GPs often did not have time to meet with ONs to discuss shared patients. We also found that ONs and GPs had different strategies for learning. While ONs belonged to a networking nursing collective aiming for continuous quality improvement, GPs learned mostly from their individual experience of caring for patients.ConclusionsThe complementary competences and autonomous roles of a specialised nurse and a general practitioner represented a good match for primary palliative care. When planning high-quality teamwork in primary care, organizational barriers to cooperation and different cultures for learning need consideration.
| S-EPMC5842567 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND: Training in palliative care is frequently requested by health care professionals. However, little is known in detail about the subject matters and the educational preferences of physicians and staff or assistant nurses in this field. METHODS: All 897 registered GPs and all 933 registered home care nurses in the district of Steiermark/Austria were sent postal questionnaires. RESULTS: Results from 546 (30%) respondents revealed that GPs prefer evening courses and weekend seminars, whereas staff and assistant nurses prefer one-day courses. Multidisciplinary sessions are preferred by almost 80% of all professional groups. GPs preferred multi disciplinary groups most frequently when addressing psychosocial needs (88.8%) and ethical questions (85.8%). Staff and assistant nurses preferred multidisciplinary groups most frequently in the area of pain management (88%) and opted for multi disciplinary learning to a significantly higher extent than GPs (69%; p < 0.01). Those topics were ranked first which are not only deepening, but supplementing the professional training. On average, GPs were willing to spend a maximum amount of euro 400 per year for training seminars in palliative care, whereas nurses would spend approximately euro 190 for such classes.The results provide a detailed analysis of the preferences of GPs and nurses and offer guidance for the organisation of training seminars in palliative care. CONCLUSIONS: Medical and nursing education programs often pursue separate paths. Yet our findings indicate that in palliative care multidisciplinary training seminars are favoured by both, doctors and nurses. Also, both groups prefer topics that are not only deepening, but supplementing their professional knowledge.
| S-EPMC2893516 | biostudies-other
Project description:BACKGROUND:Most French people (71%) would like to die at home, but only one out of four actually do. While the difficulties inherent in the practice of home-based palliative care are well described, few studies highlight the resources currently used by general practitioners (GPs) in real life. We have therefore sought to highlight the resources actually used by GPs providing home-based palliative care. METHODS:Twenty-one GPs of different ages and practice patterns agreed to participate to this qualitative study based upon semi-structured interviews. They were recruited according to a purposive sampling. Transcripts analysis was based upon General Inductive Analysis. RESULTS:The resources highlighted have been classified into two main categories according to whether they were internal or external to the GPs. The internal resources raised included the doctor's practical experience and continuous medical education, personal history, work time organization and a tacit moral contract related to the referring GP's position. External resources included resource personnel, regional assistance platforms and health facilities, legislation. CONCLUSION:This study provides a simple list that is easy to share and pragmatic solutions for GPs and policymakers. Home-based palliative care practice can simultaneously be burdensome and yet a fulfilling, meaningful activity, depending on self-efficacy and professional exhaustion (burnout), perhaps to a greater extent than on medical knowledge. Home-based palliative care promotion is a matter of social responsibility. The availability of multidisciplinary teams such as regional assistance platforms and Hospitalization at Home is particularly important for the management of palliative care. Policymakers should consolidate these specific resources out of hospitals, in community settings where the patients wish to end their life.
| S-EPMC7603704 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The implementation of early palliative care within a primary care setting is a recent academic topic. Recruiting General Practitioners (GPs) to participate in a palliative care study can be challenging. The pro-Spinoza project implemented a Care Pathway for Primary Palliative Care in 5 areas in Belgium. During this project, the feasibility of the recruitment of GPs and palliative care patients was evaluated. METHODS:The recruitment process was recorded in detail via an electronic logbook combining quantitative and qualitative data. Quantitative recordings included the contact types and the number of contacts with eligible GPs and were analysed descriptively. Qualitative recordings included field notes with feedback from the GPs and other stakeholders and were thematically analysed starting from the Grol and Wensing framework for professional behaviour change. RESULTS:Of 4065 eligible GPs working in 5 areas under research, 787 GPs (19%) were contacted individually, 398 GPs (9,8%) were contacted face-to-face and most of these 398 GPs showed high interest in the topic. 112 GPs (2,8%) signed the collaboration agreement, but finally only 65 GPs (1,6%) delivered at least a completed baseline-questionnaire. Despite the initial interest in participating, the unpredictable and busy daily workloads of the GPs, as well as inexperience with research protocols, impeded the ability of the GPs to fully engage in the study. This resulted in the high dropout rate. Participating GPs reported that they had underestimated the effort required to effectively participate in the project. CONCLUSIONS:Recruitment of GPs to palliative care research is challenging. Primary care is a vital service to engage in palliative care research however the practical limitations reduce the ability of the service to effectively engage in the research. More research is needed to determine how GPs might be better supported in research. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT02266069 , Registered 16th October 2014, retrospectively registered.
| S-EPMC6399951 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundModern palliative care focuses on enabling patients to spend their remaining time at home, and dying comfortably at home, for those patients who want it. Compared to many European countries, few die at home in Norway. General practitioners' (GPs') involvement in palliative care may increase patients' time at home and achievements of home death. Norwegian GPs are perceived as missing in this work. The aim of this study is to explore GPs' experiences in palliative care regarding their involvement in this work, how they define their role, and what they think they realistically can contribute towards palliative patients.MethodsWe performed focus group interviews with GPs, following a semi-structured interview guide. We included four focus groups with a total of 25 GPs. Interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim. We performed qualitative analysis on these interviews, inspired by interpretative phenomenological analysis.ResultsStrengths of the GP in the provision of palliative care consisted of characteristics of general practice and skills they relied on, such as general medical knowledge, being coordinator of care, and having a personal and longitudinal knowledge of the patient and a family perspective. They generally had positive attitudes but differing views about their formal role, which was described along three positions towards palliative care: the highly involved, the weakly involved, and the uninvolved GP.ConclusionGPs have evident strengths that could be important in the provision of palliative care. They rely on general medical knowledge and need specialist support. They had no consensus about their role in palliative care. Multiple factors interact in complex ways to determine how the GPs perceive their role and how involved they are in palliative care. GPs may possess skills and knowledge complementary to the specialized skills of palliative care team physicians. Specialized teams with extensive outreach activities should be aware of the potential they have for both enabling and deskilling GPs.
| S-EPMC9277777 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTo deliver optimal palliative care, a Care Pathway for Primary Palliative Care (CPPPC) was developed. This CPPPC was implemented by general practitioners (GPs) in territories of five Belgian palliative care networks (2014-2016). Belgian doctors have much therapeutic freedom, and do not commonly follow guidelines.ObjectivesTo assess how palliative care was provided by GPs before the CPPPC and its implementation project were presented publicly.MethodsBetween 2013 and 2015, seven focus groups with GPs were conducted. Participants included 15 GPs in three French-speaking focus groups and 26 GPs in four Dutch-speaking focus groups, with diversity for age, gender, palliative care experience and practice context. Some GPs implemented the CPPPC later.ResultsGPs considered each palliative care case unique and disliked strict protocols. However, they expressed a need for peer review and reflective frameworks. GPs felt it is important to identify palliative care patients 'timely', but found this difficult. Screening methods help, but are not widely used. GPs struggled most with identifying palliative care needs in non-oncological patients. Bad news breaking was considered difficult. Continuity of care was considered very important. However, advance care planning seemed more widely practised by Dutch-speaking GPs than by French-speaking GPs. The taboo of palliative care provoked emotional discussions.ConclusionPalliative care frameworks which help GPs to deliver 'tailor-made' care have more chance to be adopted than strict protocols. GPs should be given education for bad news breaking. Palliative care and advance care planning practices differ locally: guideline dissemination plans should respect these local differences.
| S-EPMC7592891 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Palliative care access is an urgent and ethical imperative to effectively manage the increasing burden of serious health-related suffering worldwide. Understanding the palliative care educational needs of health care professionals is critical to support evidence-based clinical practice in Rwanda and other low- and middle-income countries. A cross-sectional study was conducted at 5 hospitals in Kigali, Rwanda, to assess the palliative/end-of-life educational needs of nurses and physicians. The End-of-Life Professional Caregiver Survey and a demographic form were used to collect data. Descriptive analyses and independent t tests were conducted. A total of 420 health care professionals participated in the study (response rate, 72%). Participants perceived their knowledge and skills in providing palliative/end-of-life care as low. Those who received palliative/end-of-life care training in the past 5 years, third- and fourth-year residents, and health care providers with 5 years of experience or more had significantly higher (P ≤ .05) mean scores on the End-of-Life Professional Caregiver Survey. Nurses scored higher than physicians in the patient- and family-centered communication (P = .049) and cultural and ethical values (P = .037) subscales. Pain management was identified as an educational need by 77% of participants. Our survey suggests the need for increased governmental investments in palliative/end-of-life care education among nurses and physicians in Rwanda.
| S-EPMC8717681 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundGeneral practitioners (GPs), nurses and informal caregivers are often jointly involved in healthcare situations in which ethical issues play an important role.ObjectivesTo describe ethical problems from the perspective of these three groups and to investigate whether there is a common experience of ethical issues in primary care.MethodsWe conducted six focus groups with general practitioners, nurses and informal caregivers in Germany. We asked the participants to describe at least one experience of ethical problem in detail and documented the findings by an illustration software that visualized and structured the discussion. We used thematic analysis to identify ethical problems and to develop categories of ethical issues.ResultsProblems reported barely overlapped. GPs had to do mainly with uncertainty about the scope and limits of their responsibility for patients. Nurses were concerned about bureaucratic and other barriers to professional care and about dual loyalty if they had to consider the conflicting interests of patients and family members. They often felt powerless and unable to act according to their professional standards. Informal caregivers reported problems that resulted from role strain and being both a family member and a caregiver. GPs, nurses and informal caregivers sometimes perceived the other parties as a source of ethical problems.ConclusionsAll parties may benefit from ethics support services, a rarity in German primary care so far. Furthermore, nurses' self-confidence towards GPs, demanding patients and family members has to be strengthened. Informal caregivers, the most vulnerable group, need more attendance and tailored support.
| S-EPMC6425460 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Effective interprofessional collaboration (IPC) is essential for the delivery of chronic care. Interprofessional education (IPE) can help support IPC skills. This makes IPE interesting for GP practices where chronic care is delivered by GPs together with practice nurses, especially for GP trainees who have to learn to collaborate with practice nurses during their training. The aim of this study is to gain insights in how IPE and IPC occur between GP trainees and practice nurses during the delivery of chronic care in GP training practices. METHODS:We conducted a qualitative research using semi structured focus groups and interviews with GP trainees, practice nurses and GP supervisors. All respondents were primed to the subject of IPE as they had followed an interprofessional training on patient-centred communication. The verbatim transcripts of the focus groups and interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. RESULTS:Despite the overall positive attitude displayed by respondents towards IPE and IPC, the occurrence of IPE and IPC in GP training practices was limited. Possible explanations for this are impeding factors such as limited knowledge, prejudice, lack of role models and a hierarchical organisational structure. Contributing to IPE and IPC use was the integration of IPE in daily practice, e.g. via recurring scheduled meetings. CONCLUSION:We found a limited occurrence of IPE and IPC in GP training practices. Our results show a discrepancy between respondents enthusiasm for IPE and IPC and their actual behaviour. IPE activities have to be initiated in GP training practices, otherwise, despite good intentions, IPE and IPC will be ineffective.
| S-EPMC7469346 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundInterprofessional medication management in primary care is a recognized strategy for improving medication safety, but it is poorly implemented in Germany. As a pilot project, ARMIN [Arzneimittelinitiative Sachsen-Thüringen] was initiated in 2014 to establish better interprofessional medication management between general practitioners and community pharmacists.AimThe aim of this study was to explore the views of non-participating general practitioners and community pharmacists towards interprofessional medication management within ARMIN and to identify barriers to participation.MethodThis was an interview study comprising a series of semi-structured telephone interviews. In total, 36 general practitioners and 15 community pharmacists were interviewed in the period between March and June 2020. Data were analyzed using thematic analysis as an inductive approach and the consolidated framework for implementation research as a deductive approach.ResultsMany general practitioners and community pharmacists had a generally positive attitude towards interprofessional medication management. However, various barriers were identified and categorized into five major themes: (I) collaboration between general practitioners and community pharmacists, e.g. concerning general practitioners' professional sovereignty and pharmacists' fear of jeopardizing their relationship with general practitioners when interfering in therapy; (II) eligibility for participation, e.g., the fact that patients had to be insured with a specific statutory health insurance fund; (III) local circumstances, e.g. many pharmacists could not find a collaborating general practitioner (and vice versa). Moreover, patient demand was low, probably because patients were not aware of the program; (IV) information technology, e.g. concerning the lack of available software and data security concerns; and (V) cost-benefit ratio, e.g. the fact that potential benefits were outweighed by program-associated costs.ConclusionThe perceived discrepancy between positive attitudes and multiple prevalent barriers indicates considerable potential for further interprofessional collaboration between general practitioners and community pharmacists.
| S-EPMC9547634 | biostudies-literature