| Title |
Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a paediatric palliative care team
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
BMC Palliative Care, February 2018
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s12904-018-0274-8 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Lisa M. Verberne, Marijke C. Kars, Sasja A. Schepers, Antoinette Y. N. Schouten-van Meeteren, Martha A. Grootenhuis, Johannes J. M. van Delden |
| Abstract |
Over the last decade, paediatric palliative care teams (PPCTs) have been introduced to support children with life-limiting diseases and their families and to ensure continuity, coordination and quality of paediatric palliative care (PPC). However, implementing a PPCT into an organisation is a challenge. The objective of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators reported by healthcare professionals (HCPs) in primary, secondary or tertiary care for implementing a newly initiated multidisciplinary PPCT to bridge the gap between hospital and home. The Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations (MIDI) was used to assess responses of 71 HCPs providing PPC to one or more of the 129 children included in a pilot study of a PPCT based at a university children's hospital. The MIDI (29 items) assessed barriers and facilitators to implementing the PPCT by using a 5-point scale (completely disagree to completely agree) and additional open-ended questions. Items to which ≥20% of participants responded with 'totally disagree/disagree' and ≥80% responded with 'agree/totally agree' were considered as barriers and facilitators, respectively. A general inductive approach was used for open-ended questions. Reported barriers to implementing a PPCT were related to the HCP's own organisation (e.g., no working arrangements related to use of the intervention [PPCT] registered, other organisational changes such as merger going on). Reported facilitators were mainly related to the intervention (correctness, simplicity, observability and relevancy) and the user scale (positive outcome expectations, patient satisfaction) and only once to the organisation scale (information accessibility). Additionally, HCPs expressed the need for clarity about tasks of the PPCT and reported having made a transition from feeling threatened by the PPCT to satisfaction about the PPCT. Positive experiences with the PPCT are a major facilitator for implementing a PPCT. Tailored organisational strategies such as working arrangements by management, concrete information about the PPCT itself and the type of support provided by the PPCT should be clearly communicated to involved HCPs to increase awareness about benefits of the PPCT and ensure a successful implementation. New PPCTs need protection and resources in their initial year to develop into experienced and qualified PPCTs. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Portugal | 1 | 50% |
| Spain | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 1 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 50% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 161 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 161 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 29 | 18% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 9% |
| Researcher | 14 | 9% |
| Other | 8 | 5% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 4% |
| Other | 27 | 17% |
| Unknown | 61 | 38% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Nursing and Health Professions | 32 | 20% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 27 | 17% |
| Social Sciences | 11 | 7% |
| Psychology | 6 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 2% |
| Other | 13 | 8% |
| Unknown | 69 | 43% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 22 February 2018.
All research outputs
#15,492,327
of 23,023,224 outputs
Outputs from BMC Palliative Care
#1,097
of 1,257 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#273,375
of 445,207 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Palliative Care
#38
of 45 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,023,224 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,257 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.5. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 445,207 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 45 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 15th percentile – i.e., 15% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.