Perceived acceptability of a prototype toolkit to support patients and informal caregivers to express their perspectives in palliative care conversations

Annet Olde Wolsink-van Harlingen (AS) , Jan Jukema (JS) , Kris Vissers (KCP) , Madeleen Uitdehaag (MJ) , Jeroen Hasselaar (J) , Leontine Groen-van de Ven (L)
{"title":"Perceived acceptability of a prototype toolkit to support patients and informal caregivers to express their perspectives in palliative care conversations","authors":"Annet Olde Wolsink-van Harlingen (AS) ,&nbsp;Jan Jukema (JS) ,&nbsp;Kris Vissers (KCP) ,&nbsp;Madeleen Uitdehaag (MJ) ,&nbsp;Jeroen Hasselaar (J) ,&nbsp;Leontine Groen-van de Ven (L)","doi":"10.1016/j.pecinn.2025.100387","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>Patients and informal caregivers experience challenges to express their personal perspectives in conversations with healthcare professionals (HCPs). A prototype toolkit, which consists of a hardcopy version and a website, was developed to address their challenges. The aim of this study is to gain insight into the perceived acceptability of this prototype toolkit.</div></div><div><h3>Method</h3><div>Patients and informal caregivers end users and HCPs participated in semi-structured individual or group interviews. This resulted in two databases of qualitative data which were thematically analysed.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>Twenty-two end users and twelve HCPs participated in this study. There is appreciation for the content and use of the prototype toolkit, with the hardcopy version of the toolkit being valued more than the website. Moreover, the use of the toolkit may strengthen end users' power and control and may support HCPs in tailoring communication and care. End users and HCPs recommendations for implementation are to further develop the prototype toolkit, provide HCPs with information, instruction and support and create facilitating conditions in healthcare.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>High appreciation of the hardcopy version and the practical value are positive indicators of end users'and HCPS perceived acceptability of the prototype toolkit. However, the content of the toolkit is experienced as being too extensive, with the hardcopy version experienced as being incomplete without the website and the website is experienced as being too complicated to use. Further development and testing of the prototype toolkit is required to increase its acceptability by end users and HCPs.</div></div><div><h3>Innovation</h3><div>In this study a Design Thinking approach was used to test study the acceptability of a prototype toolkit by endusers and HCPs. This approach can contribute to a succesfull implementation of the toolkit and its effectiveness.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":74407,"journal":{"name":"PEC innovation","volume":"6 ","pages":"Article 100387"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-17","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"PEC innovation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2772628225000160","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

Background

Patients and informal caregivers experience challenges to express their personal perspectives in conversations with healthcare professionals (HCPs). A prototype toolkit, which consists of a hardcopy version and a website, was developed to address their challenges. The aim of this study is to gain insight into the perceived acceptability of this prototype toolkit.

Method

Patients and informal caregivers end users and HCPs participated in semi-structured individual or group interviews. This resulted in two databases of qualitative data which were thematically analysed.

Results

Twenty-two end users and twelve HCPs participated in this study. There is appreciation for the content and use of the prototype toolkit, with the hardcopy version of the toolkit being valued more than the website. Moreover, the use of the toolkit may strengthen end users' power and control and may support HCPs in tailoring communication and care. End users and HCPs recommendations for implementation are to further develop the prototype toolkit, provide HCPs with information, instruction and support and create facilitating conditions in healthcare.

Conclusion

High appreciation of the hardcopy version and the practical value are positive indicators of end users'and HCPS perceived acceptability of the prototype toolkit. However, the content of the toolkit is experienced as being too extensive, with the hardcopy version experienced as being incomplete without the website and the website is experienced as being too complicated to use. Further development and testing of the prototype toolkit is required to increase its acceptability by end users and HCPs.

Innovation

In this study a Design Thinking approach was used to test study the acceptability of a prototype toolkit by endusers and HCPs. This approach can contribute to a succesfull implementation of the toolkit and its effectiveness.
支持患者和非正式照护者在姑息关怀对话中表达观点的原型工具包的可接受性
患者和非正式护理人员在与医疗保健专业人员(HCPs)的对话中表达他们的个人观点时遇到了挑战。开发了一个原型工具包,其中包括一个硬拷贝版本和一个网站,以解决他们的挑战。本研究的目的是深入了解这个原型工具包的可接受性。方法患者、非正式照护者、最终使用者和医护人员参与半结构化的个人或团体访谈。这就产生了两个定性数据数据库,并对其进行了专题分析。结果22名终端用户和12名HCPs参与了本研究。人们对原型工具包的内容和使用表示赞赏,工具包的硬拷贝版本比网站更有价值。此外,该工具包的使用可以加强最终用户的权力和控制,并可能支持hcp定制沟通和护理。最终用户和hcp建议进一步开发原型工具包,为hcp提供信息、指导和支持,并在医疗保健领域创造便利条件。结论精印本的高赞赏度和实用价值是最终用户和HCPS对原型工具包感知接受度的积极指标。然而,该工具包的内容被认为过于广泛,没有网站的硬拷贝版本被认为是不完整的,网站被认为太复杂而无法使用。需要进一步开发和测试原型工具包,以提高最终用户和hcp对其的接受程度。创新在这项研究中,设计思维方法被用于测试研究原型工具包的可接受性,最终用户和HCPs。这种方法有助于工具包的成功实现及其有效性。
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
PEC innovation
PEC innovation Medicine and Dentistry (General)
CiteScore
0.80
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
147 days
×
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