Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35953800›Full record

ArticleBMC medical education2022

'A basic understanding'; evaluation of a blended training programme for healthcare providers in hospital-based palliative care to improve communication with patients with limited health literacy.

Janneke Noordman, Ruud Roodbeen, Leonie Gach, Lotte Schulze, Jany Rademakers, Maria van den Muijsenbergh, Gudule Boland, Sandra van Dulmen

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in BMC medical education, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
4citing papers in PubMed
2.8field-weighted citation impact, top 10% 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

4 citing papers in PubMed, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. 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

8 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Janneke NoordmanNivel (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research), PO Box 1568, 3500 BN, Utrecht, the Netherlands. j.noordman@nivel.nl.
Ruud RoodbeenNivel (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research), PO Box 1568, 3500 BN, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Leonie GachNivel (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research), PO Box 1568, 3500 BN, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Lotte SchulzeNivel (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research), PO Box 1568, 3500 BN, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Jany RademakersNivel (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research), PO Box 1568, 3500 BN, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Maria van den MuijsenberghPharos, Dutch Centre of Expertise on Health Disparities, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Gudule BolandDepartment of Family Medicine, Care and Public Health Research Institute (CAPHRI), Maastricht University, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
Sandra van DulmenNivel (Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research), PO Box 1568, 3500 BN, Utrecht, the Netherlands.
Netherlands Institute for Health Services Research · NLMaastricht University · NLRadboud University Medical Center · NLRadboud University Nijmegen · NL

Funding

Netherlands Organization for Health Research and Development, Palliative Care Program-ZonMw 844001403
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThe non-curative setting makes communication and shared decision-making in palliative care extremely demanding. This is even more so for patients with limited health literacy. So far, research in palliative care focusing on shared decision-making with patients with limited health literacy is lacking. Recent research from our team indicates that the assessment of these patients' understanding of their situation and the implementation of shared decision-making in palliative care, needs improvement.

methodsTo improve communication and decision-making, especially with patients with limited health literacy, we developed and evaluated a blended training programme for healthcare providers. The training programme comprised of an e-learning and a team training. The evaluation was performed by 1. conducting interviews (n = 15) focused on evaluating the whole programme and, 2. coding video-recorded outpatient consultations on the extent to which providers involved patients in decision-making before (n = 19) and after (n = 20) the intervention, using the 5-item OPTION coding instrument.

resultsThe interviews showed that healthcare providers valued the skills they had learned during the e-learning and team training. Providers specifically valued the teach-back technique, learned to use simpler wording and felt better able to recognize patients with limited health literacy. Many providers reported a change in communication behaviour as a consequence of the training programme. Suggestions for improvement for both e-learning and training were, amongst others, a follow-up team training course and a new scenarios for the e-learning about discussing palliative care. For both the pre- and the post-measurement, involving patients in decision-making lies between a minimal and a moderate effort; differences were not significant.

conclusionsThe e-learning and team training were valued positively by the healthcare providers. Adaptations to the e-learning have been made after evaluation. The e-learning has been implemented in several hospitals and medical education. To improve shared decision-making in practice a more sustained effort is needed.

Indexed as

Health LiteracyPalliative CareCommunicationDecision MakingHealth PersonnelHospitalsHumansBlended trainingCommunicationEducationEvaluationHealthcare providersLimited health literacyPalliative carePatientsShared decision-making

Identifiers

PMID35953800
PMCPMC9371628
OpenAlexW4291010871

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.