Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39325715›Full record

ArticlePloS one2024

Improving hospice delirium guideline adoption through an understanding of barriers and facilitators: A mixed-methods study.

Catriona Jackson, Catherine Malia, Hannah Zacharias, Judith Dyson, Miriam J Johnson

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
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.

Catriona JacksonWolfson Palliative Care Research Centre, Hull York Medical School, Hull, East Yorkshire, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0002-7806-7649
Catherine MaliaSt Gemma's Hospice, Leeds, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Hannah ZachariasSt Gemma's Hospice, Leeds, West Yorkshire, United Kingdom.
Judith DysonCentre for Social, Health and Related Research, Birmingham City University, Birmingham, West Midlands, United Kingdom.
Miriam J JohnsonWolfson Palliative Care Research Centre, Hull York Medical School, Hull, East Yorkshire, United Kingdom.ORCID 0000-0001-6204-9158

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

objectivesThis study seeks to understand and address barriers to practitioners' optimal assessment and management of people with delirium in hospices.

methodsRetrospective clinical record review to identify areas of low concordance with guideline-adherent delirium care; Survey of healthcare practitioners to identify barriers and facilitators to optimal care; Qualitative interviews with health care practitioners to explore and develop strategies to address barriers or optimise facilitators; Meeting with senior clinical staff to refine identified strategies.

resultsEighty clinical records were reviewed. Elements of poor guideline concordance were identified. Delirium screening on admission was conducted for 61% of admissions. Non-pharmacological management was documented for 59% of those we identified as having delirium from the clinical records. Survey and interview data identified key barriers to delirium assessment as competing priorities, poor knowledge and skills and lack of environmental resources (staff and guidelines, environment). Consultation with staff resulted in strategies to address barriers and enhance facilitators including champions, educational meetings, audit and feedback, and environmental changes (including careful consideration of the staff skills mix on shift and tools to support non-pharmacological management).

conclusionsWe conducted a theoretically underpinned, internationally relevant study in a hospice in England, UK. Implementation of strategies should result in greater guideline-adherent delirium care. Further work should test this in practice and include both process and clinical outcomes (e.g., reduction in delirium days).

Indexed as

DeliriumGuideline AdherenceAgedAged, 80 and overFemaleHospice CareHospicesHumansMaleMiddle AgedPractice Guidelines as TopicRetrospective StudiesSurveys and Questionnaires

Identifiers

PMID39325715
PMCPMC11426450

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.