BackgroundImplementation of quality improvements in palliative care (PC) is challenging, and detailed knowledge about factors that may facilitate or hinder implementation is essential for success. One part of the EU-funded IMPACT project (IMplementation of quality indicators in PAlliative Care sTudy) aiming to increase the knowledge base, was to conduct national studies in PC services.This study aims to identify factors perceived as barriers or facilitators for improving PC in cancer and dementia settings in Norway.MethodsIndividual, dual-participant and focus group interviews were conducted with 20 employees working in different health care services in Norway: two hospitals, one nursing home, and two local medical centers. Thematic analysis with a combined inductive and theoretical approach was applied.ResultsBarriers and facilitators were connected to (1) the innovation (e.g. credibility, advantage, accessibility, attractiveness); (2) the individual professional (e.g. motivation, PC expertise, confidence); (3) the patient (e.g. compliance); (4) the social context (e.g. leadership, culture of change, face-to-face contact); (5) the organizational context (e.g. resources, structures/facilities, expertise); (6) the political and economic context (e.g. policy, legislation, financial arrangements) and (7) the implementation strategy (e.g. educational, meetings, reminders). Four barriers that were particular to PC were identified: the poor general condition of patients in need of PC, symptom assessment tools that were not validated in all patient groups, lack of PC expertise and changes perceived to be at odds with staff’s philosophy of care.ConclusionWhen planning an improvement project in PC, services should pay particular attention to factors associated with their chosen implementation strategy. Leaders should also involve staff early in the improvement process, ensure that they have the necessary training in PC and that the change is consistent with the staff’s philosophy of care. An important consideration when implementing a symptom assessment tool is whether or not the tool has been validated for the relevant patient group, and to what degree patients need to be involved when using the tool.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12904-016-0132-5) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
Obesity (or being overweight) is now considered a by-product of membership of developed societies. Moreover, it is considered a growing 'global' health problem. This article reports on a small qualitative study of adults who fell into one or other of these categories in Norway in 2010, and who have been faced with decisions about lifestyle versus surgical remedies. This decision making is contextualized and the principal criteria examined. Embodiment, bodywork, self- and social identity, stigma, deviance and issues around the idea of personal responsibility and public health emerge as key themes. The concluding paragraphs commend incorporation of a macro- or social structural perspective to the conceptualization and investigation of obesity.
Norwegian medical emergency communication (AMK) centres are staffed by nurses, who administer requests for ambulance services or access to a doctor. The central position of nurses and the fact that they communicate with doctors by telephone and radio, make this a setting where the doctor-nurse relationship is highly visible. A two-year study of AMK centres showed that much of the work of these centres proceeds quite independently of doctors, as nurses function as competent suppliers of advice or medical oracles'. The doctor-designed Index for Medical Emergency Assistance is deficient as a tool for guiding nurses' decisions, since it fails to take account of the dynamics of real nursing practice, which is based on experiential knowledge, support from colleagues and collective learning. Data on nursing work in the AMK centres suggest that these nurses have more influence and autonomy in the nurse-doctor interaction than most past studies have indicated.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.