ArticleImplementation science communications2026
Implementing palliative care in intensive care units: assessing processes using the normalisation process theory NoMAD instrument.
Article in Implementation science communications, 2026. 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundThe importance of palliative care for Intensive Care Unit (ICU) patients/families is known. Little is known about implementing this care in practice, and how to support healthcare professionals in this implementation. This study uses survey methodology informed by Normalisation Process Theory to assess implementation processes for providing palliative care in the ICU.
methodsA descriptive cross-sectional survey was conducted with UK healthcare professionals involved in providing or organising palliative care in the ICU. Implementation processes were assessed using the validated 23-item Normalisation MeAsure Development (NoMAD) instrument. Absolute (n) and relative frequencies, median and interquartile ranges were reported. Mann-Whitney U Test assessed differences between specialist palliative care and ICU respondents. One open-ended item captured free-text responses, analysed using NPT-guided framework analysis.
resultsFrom 153 completed surveys, 69% of respondents were ICU professionals, 31% were specialist palliative care professionals. There was no statistically significant difference between responses from ICU and specialist palliative care professionals. Likert responses showed that respondents felt familiar with palliative care in the ICU and felt it was part of their normal work. Positive tendency was found toward implementation of palliative care in the ICU with coherence (sense-making work), cognitive participation (relational work) and reflexive monitoring (appraisal work). Rating of collective action (operational work) showed a more neutral tendency, highlighting this as a potential target for improvement. Free-text responses were categorised into themes within Normalisation Process Theory constructs: Coherence-recognising and stratifying need, and nuances within palliative care in the ICU; Cognitive participation-interdisciplinary interfaces and building capacity; Collective action-procedures for provision, pressures on provision, and perceived capability; Reflexive monitoring-perceived value.
conclusionThis novel study uses NPT to assess professional processes relating to implementation of palliative care in the ICU. Findings suggest important perceived implementation gaps may lie within operational work such as tailoring utilisation of existing resources, ensuring leadership support, and building skill sets. Dedicated qualitative research is needed to explain how these issues operate in context and to examine potential patient- and family-related influences.
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.