Trial reportPalliative & supportive care2025
Formative evaluation of an employee-driven approach to improve care in the dying phase in hospitals.
Trial report in Palliative & supportive care, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
11 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesThe hospital setting is often perceived as slow to change. While employee-driven approaches offer a promising alternative to traditional top-down methods, guidance is limited. This study provides a description and formative evaluation of an employee-driven working group (WG) approach to tailor ward-specific measures to improve care in the dying phase. The aim is to evaluate the WG process and offer practical insights for transferability to other hospitals.
methodsFormative mixed-methods evaluation of a WG process to tailor ward-specific evidence-informed measures on 10 wards outside specialized palliative care at 2 German medical centers. To analyze factors relevant for the WG process, the
resultsMultiprofessional WGs were established on all hospital wards, with an average of 7 meetings per ward within 1 year and 4 participants per meeting. Adapting the process to participants' wishes and needs were crucial, particularly regarding the desired degree of external input. We identified 4 barriers (e.g. declining participation, institutional limits) and 7 facilitators (e.g. involvement of staff in leading positions, multiprofessional composition). The WGs tailored 34 measures, e.g. team meetings to improve communication within the team. Participants' views were generally positive: 91% felt able to share their thoughts, 66% were satisfied with the outcome, and 77% would participate again. SIGNIFICANCE OF
resultsThe employee-driven approach was feasible and useful for tailoring ward-specific measures. However, integrating top-down elements proved to be beneficial. The identified barriers and facilitators provide insights for transferring an employee-driven approach to other hospitals to improve care in the dying phase outside specialized palliative care settings. CLINICAL
trial registrationThe study was registered in the German Clinical Trials Register (DRKS00025405).
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.