Critical attitudes and beliefs towards guidelines amongst palliative care professionals – results from a national survey

Abstract

BackgroundLittle is known about palliative care professionals’ attitudes towards guidelines. In 2015, the German Association for Palliative Medicine (DGP) published an evidence based guideline for palliative care in adults with incurable cancer. Before publication we conducted a national survey among members of the DGP to detect possible barriers and facilitators for its implementation. The aim of the present publication was to evaluate critical attitudes and beliefs which could hinder the effective implementation of the new guideline and to evaluate differences within professional groups and medical specialisations.MethodsThis web-based online survey was addressed to all members of the DGP in summer 2014. Twenty-one questions concerning attitudes and beliefs towards guidelines were a priori developed to represent the following topics: scepticism regarding the quality of guidelines, doubts about the implementation of guidelines, restrictions in treatment options through guidelines, discrepancy between palliative care values and guidelines. Differences within professions and specialisations were tested using Kruskal-Wallis tests.ResultsAll 4.786 members with known email address were invited, 1.181 followed the link, 1.138 began to answer the questionnaire and 1.031 completed the questionnaire. More than half of participating members were physicians and one third nurses. Scepticism regarding the quality of existing guidelines was high (range 12.8–73.2%). Doubts regarding practical aspects of guidelines were less prevalent but still high (range 21.8–57.6%). About one third (range 5.4–31.4%) think that guidelines restrict their treatment options. In addition, 38.8% believed that guidelines are a kind of cookbook and restrict the flexibility of individual patient care. The majority saw no or little discrepancy between palliative care values and guidelines (range 68.4–82.6%). There were relatively small but significant differences between professions and specialisations.ConclusionThe person-centred and individual approach of palliative care does not seem to contradict the acceptance of guidelines. Main barriers were related to scepticism regarding the quality of guidelines and the implementation of guidelines in general.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12904-017-0187-y) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

A systematic review of quality improvement initiatives for continuous sedation until death

“…54 Although developing guidelines could be an important instrument in improving clinical practice, the mere development of these guidelines will not directly lead to better outcomes unless they are successfully implemented into routine practice. 55–57 From the included studies we could not always verify how these guidelines and protocols were developed and more importantly how they were implemented in daily clinical practice. In their study Kalies and colleagues 55 identified attitudes and beliefs amongst palliative care professionals which could hinder the effective implementation and impact of guidelines.…”

“…55–57 From the included studies we could not always verify how these guidelines and protocols were developed and more importantly how they were implemented in daily clinical practice. In their study Kalies and colleagues 55 identified attitudes and beliefs amongst palliative care professionals which could hinder the effective implementation and impact of guidelines. Scepticism regarding the quality of existing guidelines was high and many believed that guidelines could restrict the flexibility of individual patient care.…”

The ethical climate in paediatric oncology—A national cross‐sectional survey of health‐care personnel

“…This could partly be explained by MDs having procedures for discussing difficult issues with colleagues and the multidisciplinary team and rating this collaboration as being more favourable than RNs . Moreover, support from colleagues has been identified as a main contributory factor for MDs' resilience . This could also explain why, in a Swedish paediatric oncology study, MDs had a significantly lower total moral distress score compared with RNs …”

“…12 Moreover, support from colleagues has been identified as a main contributory factor for MDs' resilience. 19 This could also explain why, in a Swedish paediatric oncology study, MDs had a significantly lower total moral distress score compared with RNs. 20 The only significant difference identified between years of experience was that NAs with less than 5 years of experience scored higher on the item on "guidelines help me" than NAs with more experience.…”

Standard Operating Procedures (SOPs) for Palliative Care in German Comprehensive Cancer Centers - an evaluation of the implementation status

“…Similar to the evaluation of the significance of different SOPs for different symptoms, the weighting of different symptoms was also analyzed in an online study. A focus on certain symptoms such as respiratory distress and pain became apparent [32,33]. The main topics of the SOPs may be identified not only in the S3 guideline on palliative medicine, but also in the ASCO [34] and the NCCN guidelines [35].…”