Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27422410›Full record

ArticleBMC palliative care2016

Barriers to and facilitators for implementing quality improvements in palliative care - results from a qualitative interview study in Norway.

Ragni Sommerbakk, Dagny Faksvåg Haugen, Aksel Tjora, Stein Kaasa, Marianne Jensen Hjermstad

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC palliative care, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 43 papers, 6 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
43citing papers in PubMed, 6 pooled it
5.1field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

43 citing papers in PubMed, 6 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 110 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Participation in the digital transformation of healthcare: a review of qualitative studies.International journal of health care quality assurance · 2024
    Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Pooled it
  7. Trial
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Ragni SommerbakkEuropean Palliative Care Research Centre (PRC), Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, NTNU, Norwegian University of Science and Technology and St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, P.O. Box 8905, N-7491, Trondheim, Norway. ragni.sommerbakk@ntnu.no.
Dagny Faksvåg HaugenEuropean Palliative Care Research Centre (PRC), Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, NTNU, Norwegian University of Science and Technology and St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, P.O. Box 8905, N-7491, Trondheim, Norway.
Aksel TjoraDepartment of Sociology and Political Science, Norwegian University of Science and Technology, Trondheim, Norway.
Stein KaasaEuropean Palliative Care Research Centre (PRC), Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, NTNU, Norwegian University of Science and Technology and St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, P.O. Box 8905, N-7491, Trondheim, Norway.
Marianne Jensen HjermstadEuropean Palliative Care Research Centre (PRC), Department of Cancer Research and Molecular Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, NTNU, Norwegian University of Science and Technology and St. Olavs Hospital, Trondheim University Hospital, P.O. Box 8905, N-7491, Trondheim, Norway.
Norwegian University of Science and Technology · NOOslo University Hospital · NO

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

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.

Indexed as

Quality ImprovementAmbulatory Care FacilitiesAttitude of Health PersonnelClinical CompetenceDementiaDiffusion of InnovationEducation, NursingHealthcare FinancingHealth PolicyHealth ResourcesHospitalizationHumansInterprofessional RelationsLeadershipMotivationNeoplasmsBarrierCancerDementiaEnd-of-lifeFacilitatorImplementation strategyNorwayOrganization of carePalliative careQuality improvement

Identifiers

PMID27422410
PMCPMC4947264
OpenAlexW2468350587

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.