BackgroundCancer is the leading cause of death in the developed world, and yet healthcare practitioners infrequently discuss goals of care (GoC) with hospitalized cancer patients. We sought to identify barriers to GoC discussions from the perspectives of staff oncologists, oncology residents, and oncology nurses.MethodsThis was a single center survey of staff oncologists, oncology residents, and inpatient oncology nurses. Barriers to GoC discussions were assessed on a 7-point Likert scale (1 = extremely unimportant; 7 = extremely important).ResultsBetween July 2013 and May 2014, of 185 eligible oncology clinicians, 30 staff oncologists, 10 oncology residents, and 28 oncology nurses returned surveys (response rate of 37%). The most important barriers to GoC discussions were patient and family factors. They included family members’ difficulty accepting poor prognoses (mean score 5.9, 95% CI [5.7, 6.2]), lack of family agreement in the goals of care (mean score 5.8, 95% CI [5.5, 6.1]), difficulty understanding the limitations of life-sustaining treatments (mean score 5.8, 95% CI [5.6, 6.1]), lack of patients’ capacity to make goals of care decisions (mean score 5.7, 95% CI [5.5, 6.0]), and language barriers (mean score 5.7, 95% CI [5.4, 5.9]). Participants viewed system factors and healthcare provider factors as less important barriers.ConclusionsOncology practitioners perceive patient and family factors as the most limiting barriers to GoC discussions. Our findings underscore the need for oncology clinicians to be equipped with strong communication skills to help patients and families navigate GoC discussions.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12885-019-5333-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
The aim of this study was to employ knowledge user perspectives to develop recommendations that facilitate implementation of a complex, shared decision‐making (SDM)‐based intervention in an interprofessional setting. This study was part of a larger knowledge translation (KT) study in which interprofessional teams from five freestanding, academically affiliated, rehabilitation hospitals were tasked with implementing a cognitive strategy‐based intervention approach that incorporates SDM known as Cognitive Orientation to daily Occupational Performance (CO‐OP) to treat survivors of stroke. At the end of the 4‐month CO‐OP KT implementation support period, 10 clinicians, two from each site, volunteered as CO‐OP site champions. A semi‐structured focus group was conducted with 10 site champions 3 months following the implementation support period. To meet the study objective, an exploratory qualitative research design was used. The focus group session was audio‐recorded, transcribed verbatim and analyzed through the lens of the integrated promoting action on research implementation in health services (iPARIHS) framework. The focus group participants (n = 8) consisted of occupational therapists, physical therapists, and speech language pathologists. Ten recommendations for CO‐OP implementation were extracted and co‐constructed from the focus group transcript. The recommendations reflected all four iPARHIS constructs: Facilitation, Context, Innovation, and Recipients. Implementation recommendations, from the knowledge user perspective, highlight that context‐specific facilitation is key to integrating a novel, complex intervention into interprofessional practice. Facilitators should lay out a framework for training, communication and implementation that is structured but still provides flexibility for iterative learning and active problem‐solving within the relevant practice context.
BackgroundSubstance use and substance use disorders are common in people who experience detention or incarceration in Canada, and opioid agonist treatment (OAT) may reduce the harms associated with substance use disorders. We aimed to define current physician practice in provincial correctional facilities in Ontario with respect to prescribing OAT and to identify potential barriers and facilitators to prescribing OAT.MethodsWe invited all physicians practicing in the 26 provincial correctional facilities for adults in Ontario to participate in an online survey.ResultsTwenty-seven physicians participated, with representation from most correctional facilities in Ontario. Of participating physicians, 52% reported prescribing methadone and 48% reported prescribing buprenorphine/naloxone to patients in provincial correctional facilities. Nineteen percent of participants reported initiating methadone treatment and 11% reported initiating buprenorphine/naloxone for patients in custody. Participants identified multiple barriers to initiating OAT in provincial correctional facilities including concerns about medication diversion and safety, concerns about initiating treatment in patients who are not currently using opioids, lack of linkage with community-based providers and the Ministry of Community Safety and Correctional Services policy. Identified facilitators to initiating OAT were support from institutional health care staff and administrative staff, adequate resources for program delivery and access to linkage with community-based OAT providers.ConclusionsThis study identifies opportunities to improve OAT programs and to improve access to OAT for persons in provincial correctional facilities in Ontario.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.