Practices, issues and possibilities at the interface between geriatrics and palliative care (InGaP): An exploratory study and knotworking

Erica Borgstrom, Rebekah Schiff, Shaheen A Khan, E. Hindley, D. Thayabaran, Emily Savage, Nicholas Gough, R. Holti
{"title":"Practices, issues and possibilities at the interface between geriatrics and palliative care (InGaP): An exploratory study and knotworking","authors":"Erica Borgstrom, Rebekah Schiff, Shaheen A Khan, E. Hindley, D. Thayabaran, Emily Savage, Nicholas Gough, R. Holti","doi":"10.12688/healthopenres.13534.1","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Introduction With the recognition of the need for palliative care for people with non-malignant conditions, there is an increasing emphasis on interdisciplinary working between geriatric and palliative care teams. This interdisciplinary work has evolved organically; more needs to be known about current working practices. This is of policy and clinical interest as the older patient population continues to grow. Methods An exploratory qualitative interview study was undertaken of end-of-life care for older in-patients in a large London NHS Trust. 30 semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with staff from palliative care and geriatric medical and nursing teams, two with patients and five with carers. Questions covered: examples and perceptions of collaboration and patient/carer perceptions of clarity as to who was providing care. Interviews were transcribed and thematically analysed focusing on: examples of successful collaboration; areas of tension, duplication or confusion about responsibilities; and suggestions for future practice. Results Participants were positive about collaboration. Examples of what works well include: the referral process to the palliative care team; inter-team communication and use of face-to-face handovers; unity between the teams when communicating with patients and families. Areas for potential development include: embedding palliative care within ward multidisciplinary team meetings; continual on-ward education given rotation of staff; and improving collaboration between palliative care, physiotherapy and occupational therapy. It is unclear whether patients’ and carers’ lack of awareness of the different teams has a detrimental effect on their care or needs. Conclusions There is evidence of strong collaborative working between the teams; however, this study highlights potential areas for improvement. An exploration of these relationships in other settings is required to determine if the same themes arise with a view to inform national guidelines and policy to improve care towards the end of life.","PeriodicalId":396625,"journal":{"name":"Health Open Research","volume":" 2","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health Open Research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.12688/healthopenres.13534.1","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction With the recognition of the need for palliative care for people with non-malignant conditions, there is an increasing emphasis on interdisciplinary working between geriatric and palliative care teams. This interdisciplinary work has evolved organically; more needs to be known about current working practices. This is of policy and clinical interest as the older patient population continues to grow. Methods An exploratory qualitative interview study was undertaken of end-of-life care for older in-patients in a large London NHS Trust. 30 semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with staff from palliative care and geriatric medical and nursing teams, two with patients and five with carers. Questions covered: examples and perceptions of collaboration and patient/carer perceptions of clarity as to who was providing care. Interviews were transcribed and thematically analysed focusing on: examples of successful collaboration; areas of tension, duplication or confusion about responsibilities; and suggestions for future practice. Results Participants were positive about collaboration. Examples of what works well include: the referral process to the palliative care team; inter-team communication and use of face-to-face handovers; unity between the teams when communicating with patients and families. Areas for potential development include: embedding palliative care within ward multidisciplinary team meetings; continual on-ward education given rotation of staff; and improving collaboration between palliative care, physiotherapy and occupational therapy. It is unclear whether patients’ and carers’ lack of awareness of the different teams has a detrimental effect on their care or needs. Conclusions There is evidence of strong collaborative working between the teams; however, this study highlights potential areas for improvement. An exploration of these relationships in other settings is required to determine if the same themes arise with a view to inform national guidelines and policy to improve care towards the end of life.
老年医学与姑息关怀(InGaP)之间的实践、问题和可能性:探索性研究和工作结点
引言 随着人们认识到对非恶性疾病患者进行姑息关怀的必要性,老年医学和姑息关怀团队之间的跨学科合作日益受到重视。这种跨学科工作是有机发展起来的;我们需要更多地了解目前的工作实践。随着老年患者人数的不断增加,这对政策和临床都具有重要意义。方法 对伦敦一家大型 NHS 信托基金会的老年住院病人的临终关怀进行了一项探索性定性访谈研究。研究人员对姑息治疗和老年医学及护理团队的工作人员、两名患者和五名照护者进行了 30 次半结构化定性访谈。问题包括:合作的实例和看法,以及病人/照护者对由谁提供照护的明确看法。对访谈内容进行了转录和主题分析,重点关注:成功合作的范例;关系紧张、职责重复或混乱的领域;以及对未来实践的建议。结果 参与者对合作持积极态度。其中行之有效的例子包括:向姑息关怀团队转介的流程;团队间的沟通和面对面交接的使用;与病人和家属沟通时团队间的团结。潜在的发展领域包括:将姑息关怀纳入病房多学科团队会议;在人员轮换的情况下持续开展病房教育;加强姑息关怀、物理治疗和职业治疗之间的合作。目前还不清楚病人和照护者对不同团队缺乏了解是否会对他们的照护或需求产生不利影响。结论 有证据表明,各团队之间的合作十分紧密;但是,本研究强调了需要改进的潜在领域。需要在其他环境中对这些关系进行探索,以确定是否会出现相同的主题,从而为国家指导方针和政策提供信息,改善临终关怀。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信