Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35501844›Full record

ArticleBMC palliative care2022

Integrating patient- and caregiver-reported outcome measures into the daily care routines of specialised outpatient palliative care: a qualitative study (ELSAH) on feasibility, acceptability and appropriateness.

Hannah Seipp, Jörg Haasenritter, Michaela Hach, Dorothée Becker, Dania Schütze, Jennifer Engler, Cornelia Ploeger, Stefan Bösner, Katrin Kuss

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC palliative care, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 17 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
17citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

17 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Implementation Strategies for Quality Improvement in Palliative Care: A Scoping Review.Health expectations : an international journal of public participation in health care and health policy · 2024
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. 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.

Hannah SeippDepartment of General Practice and Family Medicine, Philipps-University of Marburg, Karl-von-Frisch-Straße 4, 35032, Marburg, Germany. h.seipp@uni-marburg.de.
Jörg HaasenritterDepartment of General Practice and Family Medicine, Philipps-University of Marburg, Karl-von-Frisch-Straße 4, 35032, Marburg, Germany.
Michaela HachProfessional Association of Specialised Palliative Homecare in Hesse, Weihergasse 15, 65203, Wiesbaden, Germany.
Dorothée BeckerProfessional Association of Specialised Palliative Homecare in Hesse, Weihergasse 15, 65203, Wiesbaden, Germany.
Dania SchützeInstitute of General Practice, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Jennifer EnglerInstitute of General Practice, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Cornelia PloegerInstitute of General Practice, Goethe-University Frankfurt, Theodor-Stern-Kai 7, 60590, Frankfurt am Main, Germany.
Stefan BösnerDepartment of General Practice and Family Medicine, Philipps-University of Marburg, Karl-von-Frisch-Straße 4, 35032, Marburg, Germany.
Katrin KussDepartment of General Practice and Family Medicine, Philipps-University of Marburg, Karl-von-Frisch-Straße 4, 35032, Marburg, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROM) and caregiver-reported outcome measures can raise the patient centeredness of treatment and improve the quality of palliative care. Nevertheless, the everyday implementation of self-report in patients and caregivers is complex, and should be adapted for use in specific settings. We aimed to implement a set of outcome measures that included patient and caregiver self- and proxy-reported outcome measures in specialised outpatient palliative care (SOPC). In this study, we explore how the Integrated Palliative Outcome Scale (IPOS), IPOS Views on Care (IPOS VoC) and the Short-form Zarit Caregiver Burden Interview (ZBI-7) can be feasibly, acceptably and appropriately implemented in the daily care routines of SOPC.

methodsFive SOPC teams were trained, and used the outcome measures in daily practice. Team members were mainly nurses and physicians. To investigate their feedback, we used a multi-method qualitative design consisting of focus groups with SOPC-team members (n = 14), field notes of meetings and conversations with the SOPC teams. In an iterative process, we analysed the findings using qualitative content analysis and refined use of the outcome measures.

resultsWe found that integrating patient and caregiver outcome measures into daily care routines in SOPC is feasible. To improve feasibility, acceptability and appropriateness, the resulting burden on patients and relatives should be kept to a minimum, the usefulness of the measures must be understood, they should be used considerately, and administration must be manageable. We removed ZBI-7 from the set of measures as a result of feedback on its content and wording.

conclusionsSOPC-team members have reservations about the implementation of PROM in SOPC, but with appropriate adjustments, its application in daily care is feasible, accepted and perceived as appropriate. Previous to use, SOPC-team members should be trained in how to apply the measures, in the design of manageable processes that include integration into electronic documentation systems, and in ongoing evaluation and support. They should also be taught how useful the measures can be.

trial registrationMay 19

Indexed as

CaregiversPalliative CareFeasibility StudiesHumansOutcome Assessment, Health CareOutpatientsPatient Reported Outcome MeasuresHome Care Services [MeSH]Needs Assessment [MeSH]Palliative Care [MeSH]Patient Outcome Assessment [MeSH]Patient Reported Outcome Measures [MeSH]Qualitative Research [MeSH]Quality of Health Care [MeSH]Routinely Collected Health Data [MeSH]

Identifiers

PMID35501844
PMCPMC9063228

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.