9
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Implementation of Primary Palliative Care in five Belgian regions: A qualitative study on early identification of palliative care needs by general practitioners

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Background

          To deliver optimal palliative care, a Care Pathway for Primary Palliative Care (CPPPC) was developed. This CPPPC was implemented by general practitioners (GPs) in territories of five Belgian palliative care networks (2014–2016). Belgian doctors have much therapeutic freedom, and do not commonly follow guidelines.

          Objectives

          To assess how palliative care was provided by GPs before the CPPPC and its implementation project were presented publicly.

          Methods

          Between 2013 and 2015, seven focus groups with GPs were conducted. Participants included 15 GPs in three French-speaking focus groups and 26 GPs in four Dutch-speaking focus groups, with diversity for age, gender, palliative care experience and practice context. Some GPs implemented the CPPPC later.

          Results

          GPs considered each palliative care case unique and disliked strict protocols. However, they expressed a need for peer review and reflective frameworks. GPs felt it is important to identify palliative care patients ‘timely’, but found this difficult. Screening methods help, but are not widely used. GPs struggled most with identifying palliative care needs in non-oncological patients. Bad news breaking was considered difficult. Continuity of care was considered very important. However, advance care planning seemed more widely practised by Dutch-speaking GPs than by French-speaking GPs. The taboo of palliative care provoked emotional discussions.

          Conclusion

          Palliative care frameworks which help GPs to deliver ‘tailor-made’ care have more chance to be adopted than strict protocols. GPs should be given education for bad news breaking. Palliative care and advance care planning practices differ locally: guideline dissemination plans should respect these local differences.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: not found
          • Article: not found

          Development and evaluation of the Supportive and Palliative Care Indicators Tool (SPICT): a mixed-methods study

            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            What drives change? Barriers to and incentives for achieving evidence-based practice.

            To bridge the gap between scientific evidence and patient care we need an in-depth understanding of the barriers and incentives to achieving change in practice. Various theories and models for change point to a multitude of factors that may affect the successful implementation of evidence. However, the evidence for their value in the field is still limited. When planning complex changes in practice, potential barriers at various levels need to be addressed. Planning needs to take into account the nature of the innovation; characteristics of the professionals and patients involved; and the social, organisational, economic and political context.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: found
              Is Open Access

              The stepped wedge trial design: a systematic review

              Background Stepped wedge randomised trial designs involve sequential roll-out of an intervention to participants (individuals or clusters) over a number of time periods. By the end of the study, all participants will have received the intervention, although the order in which participants receive the intervention is determined at random. The design is particularly relevant where it is predicted that the intervention will do more good than harm (making a parallel design, in which certain participants do not receive the intervention unethical) and/or where, for logistical, practical or financial reasons, it is impossible to deliver the intervention simultaneously to all participants. Stepped wedge designs offer a number of opportunities for data analysis, particularly for modelling the effect of time on the effectiveness of an intervention. This paper presents a review of 12 studies (or protocols) that use (or plan to use) a stepped wedge design. One aim of the review is to highlight the potential for the stepped wedge design, given its infrequent use to date. Methods Comprehensive literature review of studies or protocols using a stepped wedge design. Data were extracted from the studies in three categories for subsequent consideration: study information (epidemiology, intervention, number of participants), reasons for using a stepped wedge design and methods of data analysis. Results The 12 studies included in this review describe evaluations of a wide range of interventions, across different diseases in different settings. However the stepped wedge design appears to have found a niche for evaluating interventions in developing countries, specifically those concerned with HIV. There were few consistent motivations for employing a stepped wedge design or methods of data analysis across studies. The methodological descriptions of stepped wedge studies, including methods of randomisation, sample size calculations and methods of analysis, are not always complete. Conclusion While the stepped wedge design offers a number of opportunities for use in future evaluations, a more consistent approach to reporting and data analysis is required.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Eur J Gen Pract
                Eur J Gen Pract
                The European Journal of General Practice
                Taylor & Francis
                1381-4788
                1751-1402
                20 October 2020
                2020
                : 26
                : 1
                : 146-153
                Affiliations
                [a ]Primary and Interdisciplinary Care, University of Antwerp Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences , Wilrijk, Belgium
                [b ]Institute of Health & Society (IRSS), Université catholique de Louvain Secteur des sciences de la santé , Bruxelles, Belgium
                [c ]Multidisciplinary Pain Centre, University Hospital Antwerp , Edegem, Belgium
                Author notes

                Supplemental data for this article can be accessed at https://doi.org/10.1080/13814788.2020.1825675

                CONTACT Bert Leysen bert.leysen@ 123456uantwerpen.be Primary and Interdisciplinary Care, University of Antwerp Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences , Wilrijk, Belgium
                Author information
                https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7051-7601
                https://orcid.org/0000-0002-0229-9064
                Article
                1825675
                10.1080/13814788.2020.1825675
                7592891
                33078644
                b9b48e14-7de8-4494-b33f-477ca80a94dd
                © 2020 The Author(s). Published by Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group.

                This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License ( http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                Page count
                Figures: 0, Tables: 3, Pages: 8, Words: 5602
                Categories
                Research Article
                Original Article

                Medicine
                palliative and terminal care,health care organisation and management,qualitative designs and methods,general practice/family medicine,general

                Comments

                Comment on this article