Conectar
Due to nursing shortages, an ageing population and increasing care demand, there is a growing interest in parenteral medication administration at home (PMAaH), comprising the administration of parenteral medication in the home situation of patients. The operational design of such PMAaH care pathways is complex, resulting in many variations of adoptions, showing a need for a quality framework. Although quality indicators (QIs) have been proposed to monitor the quality of specific care pathways, a generic quality framework for all types of PMAaH is lacking. Therefore, this study proposes a generic quality set for PMAaH, which includes structure and process QIs, to benchmark and redesign PMAaH care pathways to ensure high quality.
A generic QI set was developed for PMAaH using a systematic RAND appropriateness method adapted at the third phase. This method consisted of a scoping review to identify indicators, an expert panel rating phase including an online questionnaire and subsequent panel meeting to assess the appropriateness of the indicators and a retrospective practice testing to evaluate the feasibility, clarity and measurability of the indicators. After the practice testing, which consisted of an online questionnaire where experts could indicate the implementation state of all indicators in their hospital, a third expert panel adjusted the set to increase the likelihood of implementation in practice.
The experts, all healthcare professionals involved in PMAaH processes, were recruited using the snowball sampling technique from three large Dutch, teaching hospitals. Subsequently, a practice testing by self-assessment was conducted in seven large Dutch teaching hospitals.
17 and seven healthcare professionals with diverse backgrounds participated in the online questionnaire and panel meeting, respectively.
The scoping review resulted in 36 QIs for PMAaH. After two expert panel rating rounds (online questionnaire and panel meeting), two indicators were removed: a QI related to travel distance policy since it was irrelevant and redundant, and a QI stating that a clinician should take the lead in a PMAaH-team, which was deemed too restrictive. After the practice testing, two QIs were removed: a QI related to clinical response documentation, which was unclear for the practice testing respondents and already covered by other QIs, and a QI related to survival documentation, which was deemed infeasible and undesirable to measure this differently than other patients by the third expert panel.
The final set consists of 32 indicators (of which 15 were structure indicators and 17 were process indicators). The final set predominately includes QIs that are aimed at patient safety but also QIs focusing on the working conditions of the healthcare workers. 17.6% of the QIs are currently fully implemented in general in all seven hospitals. The practice testing revealed that operational QIs are more frequently implemented in practice than systemic QIs and that a structured quality assurance programme is needed in the hospitals.
This study proposes a generic quality set for PMAaH that hospitals can use to redesign and benchmark PMAaH care pathways to assure high quality. The practice testing confirmed that there is a need for this structured quality set.
To explore patient and healthcare professional perceptions about the acceptability and impact of a large-scale system for automated, real-time monitoring and feedback of shared decision-making (SDM) that has been integrated into surgical care pathways.
Qualitative, semistructured interviews were conducted with patients and healthcare professionals between June and November 2021. Data were analysed using deductive and inductive approaches.
Large-scale monitoring of SDM has been integrated in NHS surgical care across two large UK National Health Service Trusts.
Adult surgical patients (N=18, 56% female), following use of an SDM real-time monitoring and feedback system, and healthcare professionals (N=14, 36% female) involved in their surgical care. Patient recruitment was conducted through hospital research nurses and professionals by direct approach from the study team to sample individuals purposively from seven surgical specialties (general, vascular, urology, orthopaedics, breast, gynaecology and urgent cardiac).
10 themes were identified within three areas of exploration that described factors underpinning: (1) the acceptability of large-scale automated, real-time monitoring of SDM experiences, (2) the acceptability of real-time feedback and addressing SDM deficiencies and (3) the impact of real-time monitoring and feedback. There was general support for real-time monitoring and feedback because of its perceived ability to efficiently address deficiencies in surgical patients’ SDM experience at scale, and its perceived benefits to patients, surgeons and the wider organisation. Factors potentially influencing acceptability of large-scale automated, real-time monitoring and feedback were identified for both stakeholder groups, for example, influence of survey timing on patient-reported SDM scores, disease-specific risks, patients’ dissatisfaction with hospital processes. Factors particularly important for patients included concerns over digital exclusion exacerbated by electronic real-time monitoring. Factors unique to professionals included the need for detailed, qualitative feedback of SDM to contextualise patient-reported SDM scores.
This study explored factors influencing the acceptability of automated, real-time monitoring and feedback of patients’ experiences of SDM integrated into surgical practice, at scale among key stakeholders. Findings will be used to guide refinement and implementation of SDM monitoring and feedback prior to formal development, evaluation and implementation of an SDM intervention in the NHS.
doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-079155.
To describe the development of a shared decision making intervention for planning end-of-life care for patients with kidney failure, their relatives and health professionals in kidney services.
End-of-life care conversations within standard disease management consultations are challenging for patients with kidney failure, their relatives and health professionals. End-of-life care planning is about making difficult decisions in advance, which is why health professionals need shared decision making skills to be able to initiate end-of-life conversations. Health professionals report needing more skills to raise the issue of end-of-life care options within consultations and patients want to be able to discuss issues important to them about future care plans.
The development design was guided by the UK Medical Research Council's framework and a user-centred approach was applied. Four workshops were conducted with end users. The Template for Intervention Description and Replication for Population Health and Policy interventions was used to shape which questions needed to be answered through the workshops and to present the intervention. The International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) criteria set the standards to be achieved.
Areas considered significant to a shared decision making intervention were training of health professionals, conversations about end-of-life care, planning and evaluation of the decisions, reporting decisions in health records and repetition of consultation. The development process went through 14 iterations.
An intervention named DESIRE was developed that comprises: (1) a training programme for health professionals; (2) shared decision making conversations; and (3) a patient decision aid. The intervention met 30 out of 33 IPDAS criteria.
DESIRE is intended to support shared decision making about planning end-of-life care among patients with kidney failure, their relatives and health professionals. The study provides important tools for the stakeholders engaged that can be used within different models of care.
International guidelines recommend health professionals involve patients with kidney failure in making decisions about end-of-life care, but there is variation in how this is implemented within and across kidney services. Furthermore, patients, relatives and health professionals find it challenging to initiate conversations about end-of-life care.
The study resulted in the development of a complex intervention, called DESIRE, about shared decision making and planning end-of-life care for patients with kidney failure, their relatives and health professionals in kidney services, including a training programme for health professionals, shared decision making conversations and a patient decision aid.
The research contributes a shared decision making intervention to patients in the later stage of kidney failure, their relatives and health professionals. We believe that the DESIRE intervention could be introduced during consultations with health professionals at an earlier stage of the patient's illness trajectory, as well as being applied to other chronic diseases.
This intervention development research is reported according to the GUIDance for the rEporting of intervention Development (GUIDED) checklist and the DEVELOPTOOLS Reporting Checklist.
Patients, relatives and health professionals have been involved throughout the research process as part of the research team and advisory board. For this study, the advisory board has particularly contributed to the development process of the DESIRE intervention by actively participating in the four workshops, in the iterations between the workshops and in the preparation of the manuscript.
FreshRSS 