Evidence map›Paper›PMID 32220251›Full record

ArticleBMC palliative care2020

Implementation of palliative care consult Service in Hungary - integration barriers and facilitators.

Antal T Zemplényi, Ágnes Csikós, Marcell Csanádi, Maureen Rutten-van Mölken, Carmen Hernandez, János G Pitter, Thomas Czypionka, Markus Kraus, Zoltán Kaló

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC palliative care, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
2.3field-weighted citation impact, top 11% 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

6 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 16 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Guideline
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. 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

9 authors at 6 institutions in 4 countries.

Antal T ZemplényiDivision of Pharmacoeconomics, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Pécs, Rákóczi street 2., Pécs, 7623, Hungary. zemplenyi.antal@pte.hu.
Ágnes CsikósDepartment of Primary Health Care, Medical School, University of Pécs, Pécs, Hungary.
Marcell CsanádiSyreon Research Institute, Mexikói street 65/A, Budapest, H-1142, Hungary.
Maureen Rutten-van MölkenSchool of Health Policy and Management, Erasmus University Rotterdam, Rotterdam, the Netherlands.
Carmen HernandezHospital Clinic de Barcelona, Institut d'Investigacions Biomèdiques August Pi i Sunyer, Universitat de Barcelona, Barcelona, Spain.
János G PitterSyreon Research Institute, Mexikói street 65/A, Budapest, H-1142, Hungary.
Thomas CzypionkaInstitute for Advanced Studies, Vienna, Austria.
Markus KrausInstitute for Advanced Studies, Vienna, Austria.
Zoltán KalóCenter for Health Technology Assessment, Semmelweis University, Budapest, Hungary.
Institut für Höhere Studien - Institute for Advanced Studies (IHS) · ATSyreon Research Institute (Hungary)University of Pecs · HUErasmus University Rotterdam · NLSemmelweis University · HUUniversitat de Barcelona · ES

Funding

H2020 European Research Council 634288
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe Palliative Care Consult Service (PCCS) programme was among the first initiations in Hungary to provide palliative care for patients admitted to hospital. The PCCS team provides palliative care for mainly cancer patients and their family members and manages the patient pathway after being discharged from the hospital. The service started in 2014 with 300-400 patient visits per year. The aim of this study is to give a comprehensive overview of the PCCS programme guided by a conceptual framework designed by SELFIE ("Sustainable intEgrated chronic care modeLs for multi-morbidity: delivery, FInancing, and performancE"), a Horizon2020 funded EU project and to identify the facilitators and barriers to its wider implementation.

methodsPCCS has been selected by the SELFIE consortium for in-depth evaluation as one of the Hungarian integrated care models for persons with multi-morbidity. The qualitative analysis of the PCCS programme was based on available documents of the care provider and interviews with different stakeholders related to the programme.

resultsThe integrated, multidisciplinary and patient-centred approach was well-received among the patients, family members and clinical departments, as verified by the increasing number of requests for consultations. As a result of the patient pathway management across providers (e.g. from inpatient care to homecare) a higher level of coordination could be achieved in the continuity of care for seriously-ill patients. The regulatory framework has only partially been established, policies to integrate care across organizations and sectors and adequate financial mechanism to support the enhancement and sustainability of the PCCS are still missing.

conclusionsThe service integration of palliative care could be implemented successfully in an academic hospital in Hungary. However, the continuation and enhancement of the programme will require further evidence on the performance of the integrated model of palliative care and a more systematic approach particularly regarding the evaluation, financing and implementation process.

Indexed as

HumansHungaryPalliative CareQualitative ResearchQuality of Health CareReferral and ConsultationIntegrated carePalliative careQualitative studySELFIE

Identifiers

PMID32220251
PMCPMC7102442
OpenAlexW3013472011

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.