↓ Skip to main content

Evaluating the systematic implementation of the ‘Let Me Decide’ advance care planning programme in long term care through focus groups: staff perspectives

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Palliative Care, November 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (70th percentile)
  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (57th percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
6 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
36 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
156 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
Evaluating the systematic implementation of the ‘Let Me Decide’ advance care planning programme in long term care through focus groups: staff perspectives
Published in
BMC Palliative Care, November 2015
DOI 10.1186/s12904-015-0051-x
Pubmed ID
Authors

Nicola Cornally, Ciara McGlade, Elizabeth Weathers, Edel Daly, Carol Fitzgerald, Rónán O’Caoimh, Alice Coffey, D. William Molloy

Abstract

The 'Let Me Decide' Advance Care Planning (LMD-ACP) programme offers a structured approach to End-of-Life (EoL) care planning in long-term care for residents with and without capacity to complete an advance care directive/plan. The programme was implemented in three homes in the South of Ireland, with a view to improving quality of care at end of life. This paper will present an evaluation of the systematic implementation of the LMD-ACP programme in the homes. Focus groups were conducted with 15 Clinical Nurse Managers and two Directors of Nursing where the programme had been implemented. A semi-structured topic guide was used to direct questions that addressed implementation process, challenges implementing advance care planning, advantages/disadvantages and recommendations for the future. Data was analysed using manifest content analysis. Five key categories emerged, with 16 corresponding subcategories. These subcategories emerged as a result of 37 codes. Key benefits of the programme included enhancing communication, changing the care culture, promoting preference-based care and avoiding crisis decision making. Establishing capacity among residents and indecision were among the main challenges reported by staff. A number of recommendations were proposed by participants and included multi-disciplinary team involvement, and a blended approach to education on the topic. According to participants relationships with residents deepened, there was a more open and honest environment with family, end of life care focused more on symptom management, comfort and addressing spiritual care needs as opposed to crisis decision making and family conflict. The introduction of the LMD-ACP programme enhanced the delivery of care in the long-term care sites and led to a more open and positive care environment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 6 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 156 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Switzerland 1 <1%
Brazil 1 <1%
Unknown 154 99%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 19 12%
Researcher 16 10%
Student > Master 16 10%
Other 15 10%
Student > Ph. D. Student 15 10%
Other 38 24%
Unknown 37 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 43 28%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 20%
Social Sciences 13 8%
Psychology 10 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 5 3%
Other 14 9%
Unknown 40 26%
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 07 December 2015.
All research outputs
#7,056,905
of 24,713,766 outputs
Outputs from BMC Palliative Care
#798
of 1,412 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#84,074
of 290,987 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Palliative Care
#12
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,713,766 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 71st percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,412 research outputs from this source. They typically receive more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 9.3. This one is in the 43rd percentile – i.e., 43% 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 290,987 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 70% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 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 57% of its contemporaries.