Community and hospital-based healthcare professionals perceptions of digital advance care planning for palliative and end-of-life care: a latent class analysis.

Jacqueline Birtwistle, Gabriella Williamson, Samuel D Relton, Andy Bradshaw, Katherine E Sleeman, Maureen Twiddy, Pablo Millares-Martin, Suzanne Richards, Matthew J Allsop
{"title":"Community and hospital-based healthcare professionals perceptions of digital advance care planning for palliative and end-of-life care: a latent class analysis.","authors":"Jacqueline Birtwistle, Gabriella Williamson, Samuel D Relton, Andy Bradshaw, Katherine E Sleeman, Maureen Twiddy, Pablo Millares-Martin, Suzanne Richards, Matthew J Allsop","doi":"10.3310/XCGE3294","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Numerous digital approaches are being explored internationally to support the elicitation, documentation and sharing of advance care planning information. In England, Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems have been developed for this purpose, often as a template stored as part of an electronic clinical record system. Despite Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems being central to the end-of-life care policy, there has been a lack of exploration of the perspectives of healthcare professionals who use Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems and are critical to their implementation.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>This study addresses this gap aiming to examine community and hospital-based healthcare professionals' perceptions of Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems on advance care planning and the delivery of palliative care.</p><p><strong>Design and methods: </strong>A cross-sectional online survey.</p><p><strong>Setting and participants: </strong>The target sample comprised health professionals from the main professional groups supporting patients with chronic progressive illnesses in West Yorkshire and London. The survey included items adapted from the Normalisation MeAsure Development questionnaire implementation measure. Survey responses were analysed using descriptive statistics and latent class analysis. Free-text responses relating to alternative approaches to advance care planning documentation were analysed using a directed content analysis approach.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Five hundred and sixty-nine health professionals responded to the survey from West Yorkshire (<i>n</i> = 189; 33.2%) and London (<i>n</i> = 380; 66.8%). The largest proportion of respondents came from general practice teams (<i>n</i> = 254; 44.6%). There were prominent differences in responses, with respondents in London more likely to report being familiar with Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems. However, West Yorkshire respondents rated Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems more highly in terms of being a legitimate part of their role. Across professional groups, respondents from both hospice and care home teams were more likely to view Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems as being worthwhile. Commonly reported barriers to the use of Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems included not having access to electronic devices, lack of training and lack of knowledge relating to advance care plans.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>There was a dominance of responses from participants based on primary care practices, which may reflect general practitioners being largely responsible for initiating an Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems record in one region of the survey (West Yorkshire). This survey is reliant on self-reported responses to items and may have also included respondents more engaged with or interested in Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems, representing a skewed positive perspective of the systems and how they are being used in practice.</p><p><strong>Discussion: </strong>Variation exists in the way in which Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems are perceived and used across both geographical regions surveyed and the professional groups involved in palliative care delivery. There continue to be challenges experienced by those using Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems, including not having access to electronic devices, lack of training and lack of knowledge relating to advance care plans.</p><p><strong>Future work: </strong>Future research to identify the preferences of health professionals and patients as potential users of Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems could guide the development of ergonomic systems that account for the multiple challenges (i.e. physical, cognitive and organisational aspects) involved in their implementation.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme as award number NIHR129171.</p>","PeriodicalId":519880,"journal":{"name":"Health and social care delivery research","volume":" ","pages":"1-22"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health and social care delivery research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/XCGE3294","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: Numerous digital approaches are being explored internationally to support the elicitation, documentation and sharing of advance care planning information. In England, Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems have been developed for this purpose, often as a template stored as part of an electronic clinical record system. Despite Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems being central to the end-of-life care policy, there has been a lack of exploration of the perspectives of healthcare professionals who use Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems and are critical to their implementation.

Objective: This study addresses this gap aiming to examine community and hospital-based healthcare professionals' perceptions of Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems on advance care planning and the delivery of palliative care.

Design and methods: A cross-sectional online survey.

Setting and participants: The target sample comprised health professionals from the main professional groups supporting patients with chronic progressive illnesses in West Yorkshire and London. The survey included items adapted from the Normalisation MeAsure Development questionnaire implementation measure. Survey responses were analysed using descriptive statistics and latent class analysis. Free-text responses relating to alternative approaches to advance care planning documentation were analysed using a directed content analysis approach.

Results: Five hundred and sixty-nine health professionals responded to the survey from West Yorkshire (n = 189; 33.2%) and London (n = 380; 66.8%). The largest proportion of respondents came from general practice teams (n = 254; 44.6%). There were prominent differences in responses, with respondents in London more likely to report being familiar with Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems. However, West Yorkshire respondents rated Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems more highly in terms of being a legitimate part of their role. Across professional groups, respondents from both hospice and care home teams were more likely to view Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems as being worthwhile. Commonly reported barriers to the use of Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems included not having access to electronic devices, lack of training and lack of knowledge relating to advance care plans.

Limitations: There was a dominance of responses from participants based on primary care practices, which may reflect general practitioners being largely responsible for initiating an Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems record in one region of the survey (West Yorkshire). This survey is reliant on self-reported responses to items and may have also included respondents more engaged with or interested in Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems, representing a skewed positive perspective of the systems and how they are being used in practice.

Discussion: Variation exists in the way in which Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems are perceived and used across both geographical regions surveyed and the professional groups involved in palliative care delivery. There continue to be challenges experienced by those using Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems, including not having access to electronic devices, lack of training and lack of knowledge relating to advance care plans.

Future work: Future research to identify the preferences of health professionals and patients as potential users of Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems could guide the development of ergonomic systems that account for the multiple challenges (i.e. physical, cognitive and organisational aspects) involved in their implementation.

Funding: This article presents independent research funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research programme as award number NIHR129171.

社区和医院医疗保健专业人员对姑息治疗和临终关怀的数字预先护理计划的看法:潜在类别分析。
导言:国际上正在探索许多数字方法来支持预先护理计划信息的获取、记录和共享。在英国,为此目的开发了电子姑息治疗协调系统,通常作为电子临床记录系统的一部分存储的模板。尽管电子姑息治疗协调系统是临终关怀政策的核心,但一直缺乏对使用电子姑息治疗协调系统的医疗保健专业人员的观点的探索,并且对其实施至关重要。目的:本研究解决了这一差距,旨在研究社区和医院医疗保健专业人员对电子姑息治疗协调系统在预先护理计划和姑息治疗提供方面的看法。设计与方法:横断面在线调查。环境和参与者:目标样本包括来自西约克郡和伦敦支持慢性进行性疾病患者的主要专业团体的卫生专业人员。调查的项目改编自Normalisation MeAsure发展问卷的实施措施。使用描述性统计和潜在类分析对调查结果进行分析。使用定向内容分析方法分析与预先护理计划文件替代方法相关的自由文本回复。结果:来自西约克郡的569名卫生专业人员回应了调查(n = 189;33.2%)和伦敦(n = 380;66.8%)。最大比例的受访者来自全科医生团队(n = 254;44.6%)。在回应中存在显著差异,伦敦的受访者更有可能报告熟悉电子姑息治疗协调系统。然而,西约克郡的受访者对电子姑息治疗协调系统的评价更高,因为它是他们角色的合法部分。在专业群体中,来自临终关怀和护理院团队的受访者更有可能认为电子姑息治疗协调系统是值得的。通常报告的使用电子姑息治疗协调系统的障碍包括无法使用电子设备、缺乏培训和缺乏与预先护理计划有关的知识。局限性:参与者的回答主要基于初级保健实践,这可能反映了在调查的一个地区(西约克郡),全科医生主要负责启动电子姑息治疗协调系统记录。这项调查依赖于对项目的自我报告回答,可能还包括对电子姑息治疗协调系统更感兴趣或更感兴趣的受访者,这代表了对系统及其在实践中如何使用的扭曲的积极观点。讨论:在接受调查的地理区域和参与姑息治疗提供的专业团体中,电子姑息治疗协调系统的感知和使用方式存在差异。使用电子姑息治疗协调系统的人仍然面临挑战,包括无法使用电子设备、缺乏培训和缺乏与预先护理计划有关的知识。未来的工作:未来的研究确定卫生专业人员和患者作为电子姑息治疗协调系统的潜在用户的偏好,可以指导人体工程学系统的发展,这些系统可以解释其实施过程中涉及的多重挑战(即身体,认知和组织方面)。资助:本文介绍了由国家卫生和保健研究所(NIHR)卫生和社会保健提供研究项目资助的独立研究,奖励号为NIHR129171。
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:604180095
Book学术官方微信