ObjectivesTo identify the factors that promote and inhibit the implementation of interventions that improve communication and decision-making directed at goals of care in the event of acute clinical deterioration.Design and methodsA scoping review was undertaken based on the methodological framework of Arksey and O’Malley for conducting this type of review. Searches were carried out in Medline and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL) to identify peer-reviewed papers and in Google to identify grey literature. Searches were limited to those published in the English language from 2000 onwards. Inclusion and exclusion criteria were applied, and only papers that had a specific focus on implementation in practice were selected. Data extracted were treated as qualitative and subjected to directed content analysis. A theory-informed coding framework using Normalisation Process Theory (NPT) was applied to characterise and explain implementation processes.ResultsSearches identified 2619 citations, 43 of which met the inclusion criteria. Analysis generated six themes fundamental to successful implementation of goals of care interventions: (1) input into development; (2) key clinical proponents; (3) training and education; (4) intervention workability and functionality; (5) setting and context; and (6) perceived value and appraisal.ConclusionsA broad and diverse literature focusing on implementation of goals of care interventions was identified. Our review recognised these interventions as both complex and contentious in nature, making their incorporation into routine clinical practice dependent on a number of factors. Implementing such interventions presents challenges at individual, organisational and systems levels, which make them difficult to introduce and embed. We have identified a series of factors that influence successful implementation and our analysis has distilled key learning points, conceptualised as a set of propositions, we consider relevant to implementing other complex and contentious interventions.
Background Many people move in and out of hospital in the last few weeks of life. These care transitions can be distressing for family members because they signify the deterioration and impending death of their ill relative and forthcoming family bereavement. Whilst there is evidence about psychosocial support for family members providing end-of-life care at home, there is limited evidence about how this can be provided in acute hospitals during care transitions. Consequently, family members report a lack of support from hospital-based healthcare professionals. Methods The aim of the study was to implement research evidence for family support at the end-of-life in acute hospital care. Informed by Participatory Learning and Action Research and Normalization Process Theory (NPT) we co-designed a context-specific intervention, the Family-Focused Support Conversation, from a detailed review of research evidence. We undertook a pilot implementation in three acute hospital Trusts in England to assess the potential for the intervention to be used in clinical practice. Pilot implementation was undertaken during a three-month period by seven clinical co-researchers - nurses and occupational therapists in hospital specialist palliative care services. Implementation was evaluated through data comprised of reflective records of intervention delivery (n = 22), in-depth records of telephone implementation support meetings between research team members and co-researchers (n = 3), and in-depth evaluation meetings (n = 2). Data were qualitatively analysed using an NPT framework designed for intervention evaluation. Results Clinical co-researchers readily incorporated the Family-Focused Support Conversation into their everyday work. The intervention changed family support from being solely patient-focused, providing information about patient needs, to family-focused, identifying family concerns about the significance and implications of discharge and facilitating family-focused care. Co-researchers reported an increase in family members’ involvement in discharge decisions and end-of-life care planning. Conclusion The Family-Focused Support Conversation is a novel, evidenced-based and context specific intervention. Pilot implementation demonstrated the potential for the intervention to be used in acute hospitals to support family members during end-of-life care transitions. This subsequently informed a larger scale implementation study. Trial registration n/a.
Background: Pain is a frequently reported symptom by patients approaching the end of life and wellestablished that patients and carers hold fears relating to opioids, and experience side effects related to their use. The management of medicines is intrinsic to achieving effective pain relief. The concept of self-management support whilst well characterised in the context of chronic illness has not been elaborated with respect to end of life care. Aim: To identify patient, carer and professional views on the concept of self-management support at end of life, specifically in relation to analgesia and related medicines (for side-effect management) in order to describe, characterise and explain self-management support in this context. Methodology & Methods:Qualitative design, data collection methods involved focus groups and interviews. Topics included the meaning of self-management support in this context, roles and behaviours adopted to manage pain-related medicines, and factors that influence these. A largely deductive approach was used, involving verification and validation of key frameworks from the literature, but with capacity for new findings to emerge. Setting: Participants were drawn from two different localities in England, one North, the other South. Interviews with patients and carers took place in their own homes and focus groups with healthcare professionals were held at local hospices. Participants: 38 individuals participated. 15 patients, in the last year of life, and 4 carers under the care of community-based specialist palliative care services and 19 specialist palliative care health professionals (predominantly community palliative care nurses). Findings: The concept of self-management support had salience for patients, carers and specialist nurses alongside some unique features, specific to the end of life context. Specifically selfmanagement was identified as an ever-changing process enacted along a continuum of behaviours fluctuating from full to no engagement. Disease progression, frequent changes in symptoms and sideeffects, led to a complex web of roles and behaviours, varying day by day, if not hour by hour. Data confirmed previously proposed professional roles were enacted to support self-management. Furthermore, as patients, carers and clinical nurse specialists worked together to achieve effective pain management, they enacted and inter-acted in the roles of advocate, educator, facilitator, problem solver, communicator, goal setter, monitor and reporter. Conclusions: The study has demonstrated what self-management support at end of life entails and how it is enacted in practice.
BackgroundPain affects most people approaching the end of life and can be severe for some. Opioid analgesia is effective, but evidence is needed about how best to support patients in managing these medicines.ObjectivesTo develop a self-management support toolkit (SMST) and delivery strategy and to test the feasibility of evaluating this intervention in a future definitive trial.DesignPhase I – evidence synthesis and qualitative interviews with patients and carers. Phase II – qualitative semistructured focus groups and interviews with patients, carers and specialist palliative care health professionals. Phase III – multicentre mixed-methods single-arm pre–post observational feasibility study.ParticipantsPhase I – six patients and carers. Phase II – 15 patients, four carers and 19 professionals. Phase III – 19 patients recruited to intervention that experienced pain, living at home and were treated with strong opioid analgesia. Process evaluation interviews with 13 patients, seven carers and 11 study nurses.InterventionSelf-Management of Analgesia and Related Treatments at the end of life (SMART) intervention comprising a SMST and a four-step educational delivery approach by clinical nurse specialists in palliative care over 6 weeks.Main outcome measuresRecruitment rate, treatment fidelity, treatment acceptability, patient-reported outcomes (such as scores on the Brief Pain Inventory, Self-Efficacy for Managing Chronic Disease Scale, Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale, EuroQol-5 Dimensions, Satisfaction with Information about Medicines Scale, and feasibility of collecting data on health-care resource use for economic evaluation).ResultsPhase I – key themes on supported self-management were identified from evidence synthesis and qualitative interviews. Phase II – the SMST was developed and refined. The delivery approach was nested within a nurse–patient consultation. Phase III – intervention was delivered to 17 (89%) patients, follow-up data at 6 weeks were available on 15 patients. Overall, the intervention was viewed as acceptable and valued. Descriptive analysis of patient-reported outcomes suggested that interference from pain and self-efficacy were likely to be candidates for primary outcomes in a future trial. No adverse events related to the intervention were reported. The health economic analysis suggested that SMART could be cost-effective. We identified key limitations and considerations for a future trial: improve recruitment through widening eligibility criteria, refine the SMST resources content, enhance fidelity of intervention delivery, secure research nurse support at recruiting sites, refine trial procedures (including withdrawal process and data collection frequency), and consider a cluster randomised design with nurse as cluster unit.Limitations(1) The recruitment rate was lower than anticipated. (2) The content of the intervention was focused on strong opioids only. (3) The fidelity of intervention delivery was limited by the need for ongoing training and support. (4) Recruitment sites where clinical research nurse support was not secured had lower recruitment rates. (5) The process for recording withdrawal was not sufficiently detailed. (6) The number of follow-up visits was considered burdensome for some participants. (7) The feasibility trial did not have a control arm or assess randomisation processes.ConclusionsA future randomised controlled trial is feasible and acceptable.Study and trial registrationThis study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42014013572; Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN35327119; and National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Portfolio registration 162114.FundingThe NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme.
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.