ArticlePalliative care and social practice2025
Implementation of a hospice community service redesign: Qualitative research identifying lessons learned.
Article in Palliative care and social practice, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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.
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.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Construction of Outcome Quality Evaluation Indicators for Home Hospice Care in Older Patients with Terminal Cancer in China: A Delphi Study.Clinical interventions in aging · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Background: The need to improve equity of access to palliative care is well recognized; however, much less is known about how new models of hospice community services can be successfully introduced. Aim: We aimed to capture learning from the implementation experiences of hospice stakeholders during the first 12 months of a hospice community services redesign. Design: Qualitative research using individual semi-structured interviews ( Methods: Participants were clinical and non-clinical staff, hospice leaders, volunteers, and external stakeholders. Interviews were analysed with framework analysis using Normalisation Process Theory. Focus groups were used to confirm and prioritise recommendations. Results: Implementation is more likely to be successful where hospice personnel are enabled to work together in understanding and adapting to new ways of working. Participants gave examples of being supported to plan activities, to form networks of participation, to pilot new ways of working, and to appraise and improve their work. Receiving feedback on progress is beneficial. Implementation strategies that are tailored to each context could be effective if they engage with hospice stakeholders to ensure that strategic aims are well-understood and that the necessary resources are available. Positive experiences of implementation are more likely where stakeholders understand the changes and can participate in planning. Where necessary, changes to human resources and technology support systems would ideally be adopted prior to making changes to patient-facing services. Conclusion: This study contributes knowledge from a charitable provider of specialist palliative care during the implementation of a hospice community service redesign. We identified opportunities for future improvement, particularly regarding communication, planning, prioritisation, and feedback. Investment of time and reflection during implementation can support the ambition of hospices to become integrated within a place-based system, to improve access to palliative care within the communities they serve. We report key implementation recommendations for organisations considering service redesign.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.