Quality of palliative and end-of-life care: a qualitative study of experts' recommendations to improve indicators in Quebec (Canada).

IF 2.5 2区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Emilie Allard, Sarah Dumaine, Martin Sasseville, Morgane Gabet, Arnaud Duhoux
{"title":"Quality of palliative and end-of-life care: a qualitative study of experts' recommendations to improve indicators in Quebec (Canada).","authors":"Emilie Allard, Sarah Dumaine, Martin Sasseville, Morgane Gabet, Arnaud Duhoux","doi":"10.1186/s12904-024-01474-8","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>In 2021, the National Institute of Public Health (INSPQ) (Quebec, Canada), published an update of the palliative and end-of-life care (PEoLC) indicators. Using these updated indicators, this qualitative study aimed to explore the point of view of PEoLC experts on how to improve access and quality of care as well as policies surrounding end-of-life care.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Semi-directed interviews were conducted with palliative care and policy experts, who were asked to share their interpretations on the updated indicators and their recommendations to improve PEoLC. A thematic analysis method was used.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The results highlight two categories of interpretations and recommendations pertaining to: (1) data and indicators and (2) clinical and organizational practice. Participants highlight the lack of reliability and quality of the data and indicators used by political and clinical stakeholders in evaluating PEoLC. To improve data and indicators, they recommend: improving the rigour and quality of collected data, assessing death percentages in all healthcare settings, promoting research on quality of care, comparing data to EOL care directives, assessing use of services in EOL, and creating an observatory on PEoLC. Participants also identified barriers and disparities in accessing PEoLC as well as inconsistency in quality of care. To improve PEoLC, they recommend: early identification of palliative care patients, improving training for all healthcare professionals, optimizing professional practice, integrating interdisciplinary teams, and developing awareness on access disparities.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Results show that PEoLC is an important aspect of public health. Recommendations issued are relevant to improve PEoLC in and outside Quebec.</p>","PeriodicalId":48945,"journal":{"name":"BMC Palliative Care","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-10","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11163802/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12904-024-01474-8","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: In 2021, the National Institute of Public Health (INSPQ) (Quebec, Canada), published an update of the palliative and end-of-life care (PEoLC) indicators. Using these updated indicators, this qualitative study aimed to explore the point of view of PEoLC experts on how to improve access and quality of care as well as policies surrounding end-of-life care.

Methods: Semi-directed interviews were conducted with palliative care and policy experts, who were asked to share their interpretations on the updated indicators and their recommendations to improve PEoLC. A thematic analysis method was used.

Results: The results highlight two categories of interpretations and recommendations pertaining to: (1) data and indicators and (2) clinical and organizational practice. Participants highlight the lack of reliability and quality of the data and indicators used by political and clinical stakeholders in evaluating PEoLC. To improve data and indicators, they recommend: improving the rigour and quality of collected data, assessing death percentages in all healthcare settings, promoting research on quality of care, comparing data to EOL care directives, assessing use of services in EOL, and creating an observatory on PEoLC. Participants also identified barriers and disparities in accessing PEoLC as well as inconsistency in quality of care. To improve PEoLC, they recommend: early identification of palliative care patients, improving training for all healthcare professionals, optimizing professional practice, integrating interdisciplinary teams, and developing awareness on access disparities.

Conclusions: Results show that PEoLC is an important aspect of public health. Recommendations issued are relevant to improve PEoLC in and outside Quebec.

姑息治疗和临终关怀的质量:魁北克(加拿大)专家建议改进指标的定性研究。
背景:2021年,加拿大魁北克省国家公共卫生研究所(INSPQ)发布了姑息治疗和临终关怀(PEoLC)指标的更新版。利用这些更新指标,本定性研究旨在探讨姑息治疗和临终关怀专家对如何改善临终关怀的可及性和质量以及相关政策的观点:方法:对姑息关怀和政策专家进行了半定向访谈,要求他们分享对更新指标的解释以及对改善临终关怀的建议。采用了主题分析方法:结果:结果突出了两类解释和建议,分别涉及(1) 数据和指标;(2) 临床和组织实践。参与者强调,政治和临床利益相关者在评估 PEoLC 时使用的数据和指标缺乏可靠性和质量。为改进数据和指标,他们建议:提高所收集数据的严谨性和质量,评估所有医疗机构的死亡比例,促进护理质量研究,将数据与临终关怀指令进行比较,评估临终关怀服务的使用情况,以及建立 PEoLC 观察站。与会者还指出了在获得 PEoLC 方面存在的障碍和差异,以及护理质量的不一致性。为改善PEoLC,他们建议:尽早识别姑息关怀患者,加强对所有医护专业人员的培训,优化专业实践,整合跨学科团队,并提高对获取差异的认识:结论:研究结果表明,姑息治疗是公共卫生的一个重要方面。所提出的建议对改善魁北克省内外的姑息关怀具有现实意义。
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
BMC Palliative Care
BMC Palliative Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
9.70%
发文量
201
审稿时长
21 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Palliative Care is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in the clinical, scientific, ethical and policy issues, local and international, regarding all aspects of hospice and palliative care for the dying and for those with profound suffering related to chronic illness.
×
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