Aim To identify facilitators and barriers to implementing outcome measures. Methods An action-research approach within a hospice and nursing home was used. Staff took part in semistructured interviews pre- and post-implementation of the Palliative Care Outcome Scale (POS), completed diaries and participated in monthly meetings. Findings Qualitative content analysis identified barriers to implementation including: a top-down decision-making approach; outcome measures perceived as time-consuming to use; limited resources for data analysis; and a lack of knowledge of the importance of outcome measures. Facilitators to successful implementation include: involving all staff in decisions about implementation; and using a measure that can be adapted to organization needs and clinical practice. The benefits of using the measure are rapidly noticeable. Conclusions Given the need to evaluate services and the role outcome measures can have within clinical governance, this article indicates methods by which measures may be more successfully implemented.

No abstract

No abstract

In palliative care, outcome measures are increasingly used to aid clinical practice, conduct audit and research. The objective of this study was to elicit professionals' views and experiences of using outcome measures, paying special attention to the Palliative care Outcome Scale (POS). This article presents the results of a qualitative study of 26 professionals, experienced in using the POS, who were invited to participate in semi-structured telephone interviews. Of those invited, 22 people took part. Participants' comments were noted verbatim through the interviews and data subjected to content analysis. Analysis of data identified a number of key themes surrounding outcome measures, notably their reasons for use, application in clinical settings and a range of professionals' attitudes. The article concludes that understanding the process of outcome measures is important for improving their implementation. When undertaking further research, attention should be paid to the wider social, cultural and structural contexts, as factors that can influence the implementation of outcome measures. As the drive towards outcome measures continues, it is essential that measures are not developed in a vacuum. Instead they should always be informed by the needs and experiences of individuals and services.

Clinical tools provide benefits in identifying patients' problems, guiding patient care, and evaluating treatments and interventions. Translating these tools can help to bridge the language gap that hinders good communication between nurses and patients. Translated clinical tools can be of acceptable cultural equivalence and validity if high quality translation methodologies are employed, together with an awareness of culturally relevant issues when interpreting the information gained from the tools.