↓ Skip to main content

Bereaved family members’ perceptions of the quality of end-of-life care across four types of inpatient care settings

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Palliative Care, November 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#49 of 1,489)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (90th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
57 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
19 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
183 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Bereaved family members’ perceptions of the quality of end-of-life care across four types of inpatient care settings
Published in
BMC Palliative Care, November 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12904-017-0237-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Kelli Stajduhar, Richard Sawatzky, S. Robin Cohen, Daren K. Heyland, Diane Allan, Darcee Bidgood, Leah Norgrove, Anne M. Gadermann

Abstract

The aims of this study were to gain a better understanding of how bereaved family members perceive the quality of EOL care by comparing their satisfaction with quality of end-of-life care across four different settings and by additionally examining the extent to which demographic characteristics and psychological variables (resilience, optimism, grief) explain variation in satisfaction. A cross-sectional mail-out survey was conducted of bereaved family members of patients who had died in extended care units (n = 63), intensive care units (n = 30), medical care units (n = 140) and palliative care units (n = 155). 1254 death records were screened and 712 bereaved family caregivers were identified as eligible, of which 558 (who were initially contacted by mail and then followed up by phone) agreed to receive a questionnaire and 388 returned a completed questionnaire (response rate of 70%). Measures included satisfaction with end-of-life care (CANHELP- Canadian Health Care Evaluation Project - family caregiver bereavement version; scores range from 0 = not at all satisfied to 5 = completely satisfied), grief (Texas Revised Inventory of Grief (TRIG)), optimism (Life Orientation Test - Revised) and resilience (The Resilience Scale). ANCOVA and multivariate linear regression were used to analyze the data. Family members experienced significantly lower satisfaction in MCU (mean = 3.69) relative to other settings (means of 3.90 [MCU], 4.14 [ICU], and 4.00 [PCU]; F (3371) = 8.30, p = .000). Statistically significant differences were also observed for CANHELP subscales of "doctor and nurse care", "illness management", "health services" and "communication". The regression model explained 18.9% of the variance in the CANHELP total scale, and between 11.8% and 27.8% of the variance in the subscales. Explained variance in the CANHELP total score was attributable to the setting of care and psychological characteristics of family members (44%), in particular resilience. Findings suggest room for improvement across all settings of care, but improving quality in acute care and palliative care should be a priority. Resiliency appears to be an important psychological characteristic in influencing how family members appraise care quality and point to possible sites for targeted intervention.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 57 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 183 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 183 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 31 17%
Student > Master 28 15%
Student > Postgraduate 8 4%
Other 8 4%
Student > Doctoral Student 7 4%
Other 25 14%
Unknown 76 42%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 55 30%
Medicine and Dentistry 22 12%
Psychology 9 5%
Unspecified 6 3%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 4 2%
Other 8 4%
Unknown 79 43%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 39. 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 14 January 2020.
All research outputs
#1,047,493
of 25,355,907 outputs
Outputs from BMC Palliative Care
#49
of 1,489 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#23,459
of 452,088 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Palliative Care
#4
of 32 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,355,907 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 95th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,489 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.2. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its peers.
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 452,088 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 32 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 90% of its contemporaries.