Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39151167›Full record

ArticleJournal of medical Internet research2024

Factors Influencing the Implementation of Digital Advance Care Planning: Qualitative Interview Study.

Andy Bradshaw, Jacqueline Birtwistle, Catherine J Evans, Katherine E Sleeman, Suzanne Richards, Robbie Foy, Pablo Millares Martin, Paul Carder, Matthew J Allsop, Maureen Twiddy

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Journal of medical Internet research, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

10 authors.

Andy BradshawCicely Saunders Institute, Kings College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1717-1546
Jacqueline BirtwistleLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-6083-589X
Catherine J EvansCicely Saunders Institute, Kings College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0034-7402
Katherine E SleemanCicely Saunders Institute, Kings College London, London, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-9777-4373
Suzanne RichardsLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-1416-0569
Robbie FoyLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0003-0605-7713
Pablo Millares MartinWhitehall Surgery, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-7262-1592
Paul CarderNHS West Yorkshire Integrated Care Board, White Rose House, Wakefield, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7940-6016
Matthew J AllsopLeeds Institute of Health Sciences, University of Leeds, Leeds, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7399-0194
Maureen TwiddyHull York Medical School, Institute of Clinical and Applied Health Research, Allam Medical Building, University of Hull, Hull, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-3794-1598

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPalliative care aims to improve the quality of life for people with life-limiting illnesses. Advance care planning conversations that establish a patient's wishes and preferences for care are part of a person-centered approach. Internationally, electronic health record systems are digital interventions used to record and share patients' advance care plans across health care services and settings. They aim to provide tools that support electronic information sharing and care coordination. Within the United Kingdom, Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems (EPaCCS) are an example of this. Despite over a decade of policy promoting EPaCCS nationally, there has been limited implementation and consistently low levels of use by health professionals.

objectiveThe aim of this study is to explore the factors that influence the implementation of EPaCCS into routine clinical practice across different care services and settings in 2 major regions of England.

methodsA qualitative interview study design was used, guided by Normalization Process Theory (NPT). NPT explores factors affecting the implementation of complex interventions and consists of 4 primary components (coherence, cognitive participation, collective action, and reflexive monitoring). Health care and social care practitioners were purposively sampled based on their professional role and work setting. Individual web-based semistructured interviews were conducted. Data were analyzed using thematic framework analysis to explore issues which affected the implementation of EPaCCS across different settings at individual, team, organizational, and technical levels.

resultsParticipants (N=52) representing a range of professional roles were recruited across 6 care settings (hospice, primary care, care home, hospital, ambulatory, and community). In total, 6 themes were developed which mapped onto the 4 primary components of NPT and represented the multilevel influences affecting implementation. At an individual level, these included (1) EPaCCS providing a clear and distinct way of working and (2) collective contributions and buy-in. At a team and organizational level, these included (3) embedding EPaCCS into everyday practice and (4) championing driving implementation. At a technical level, these included (5) electronic functionality, interoperability, and access. Breakdowns in implementation at different levels led to variations in (6) confidence and trust in EPaCCS in terms of record accuracy and availability of access.

conclusionsEPaCCS implementation is influenced by individual, organizational, and technical factors. Key challenges include problems with access alongside inconsistent use and engagement across care settings. EPaCCS, in their current format as digital advance care planning systems are not consistently facilitating electronic information sharing and care coordination. A redesign of EPaCCS is likely to be necessary to determine configurations for their optimal implementation across different settings and locations. This includes supporting health care practitioners to document, access, use, and share information across multiple care settings. Lessons learned are relevant to other forms of digital advance care planning approaches being developed internationally.

Indexed as

Advance Care PlanningQualitative ResearchElectronic Health RecordsEnglandFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMalePalliative CareUnited Kingdomadvance care planningelectronic health record systemselectronic palliative care coordination systemsend of life careNormalization Process TheoryNPTpalliative carequalitativetechnology

Identifiers

PMID39151167
PMCPMC11364948

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.