↓ Skip to main content

“Sometimes we can’t fix things”: a qualitative study of health care professionals’ perceptions of end of life care for patients with heart failure

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Palliative Care, January 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (75th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (51st percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
8 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
163 Mendeley
Title
“Sometimes we can’t fix things”: a qualitative study of health care professionals’ perceptions of end of life care for patients with heart failure
Published in
BMC Palliative Care, January 2016
DOI 10.1186/s12904-016-0074-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Margaret Glogowska, Rosemary Simmonds, Sarah McLachlan, Helen Cramer, Tom Sanders, Rachel Johnson, Umesh T. Kadam, Daniel S. Lasserson, Sarah Purdy

Abstract

Although heart failure has a worse prognosis than some cancers, patients often have restricted access to well-developed end of life (EoL) models of care. Studies show that patients with advanced heart failure may have a poor understanding of their condition and its outcome and, therefore, miss opportunities to discuss their wishes for EoL care and preferred place of death. We aimed to explore the perceptions and experiences of health care professionals (HCPs) working with patients with heart failure around EoL care. A qualitative in-depth interview study nested in a wider ethnographic study of unplanned admissions in patients with heart failure (HoldFAST). We interviewed 24 HCPs across primary, secondary and community care in three locations in England, UK - the Midlands, South Central and South West. The study revealed three issues impacting on EoL care for heart failure patients. Firstly, HCPs discussed approaches to communicating with patients about death and highlighted the challenges involved. HCPs would like to have conversations with patients and families about death and dying but are aware that patient preferences are not easy to predict. Secondly, professionals acknowledged difficulties recognising when patients have reached the end of their life. Lack of communication between patients and professionals can result in situations where inappropriate treatment takes place at the end of patients' lives. Thirdly, HCPs discussed the struggle to find alternatives to hospital admission for patients at the end of their life. Patients may be hospitalised because of a lack of planning which would enable them to die at home, if they so wished. The HCPs regarded opportunities for patients with heart failure to have ongoing discussions about their EoL care with clinicians they know as essential. These key professionals can help co-ordinate care and support in the terminal phase of the condition. Links between heart failure teams and specialist palliative care services appear to benefit patients, and further sharing of expertise between teams is recommended. Further research is needed to develop prognostic models to indicate when a transition to palliation is required and to evaluate specialist palliative care services where heart failure patients are included.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 8 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 163 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Spain 1 <1%
Switzerland 1 <1%
Unknown 161 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 25 15%
Student > Master 22 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 13%
Researcher 12 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 6%
Other 24 15%
Unknown 49 30%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 43 26%
Nursing and Health Professions 38 23%
Psychology 8 5%
Social Sciences 7 4%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 2%
Other 9 6%
Unknown 55 34%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 20 October 2016.
All research outputs
#6,155,352
of 23,316,003 outputs
Outputs from BMC Palliative Care
#679
of 1,269 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#97,799
of 398,191 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Palliative Care
#15
of 29 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,316,003 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,269 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 46th percentile – i.e., 46% 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 398,191 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 29 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 51% of its contemporaries.