儿科姑息关怀门诊发展:建立可持续计划指南》。

IF 2.2 3区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Journal of palliative medicine Pub Date : 2024-11-01 Epub Date: 2024-08-21 DOI:10.1089/jpm.2024.0148
Casie James, Suraj Sarvode Mothi, Elissa G Miller, Erica C Kaye, Alexis Morvant, Caroline Stafford, Ashley K Autrey
{"title":"儿科姑息关怀门诊发展:建立可持续计划指南》。","authors":"Casie James, Suraj Sarvode Mothi, Elissa G Miller, Erica C Kaye, Alexis Morvant, Caroline Stafford, Ashley K Autrey","doi":"10.1089/jpm.2024.0148","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b><i>Context:</i></b> As pediatric palliative care (PPC) expands within institutions and nationally, little guidance is available on building outpatient programs. <b><i>Objectives:</i></b> We asked outpatient PPC (OPPC) program leaders in the United States about clinic development experiences to gather advice for growing programs. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> As part of a larger OPPC study, 48 freestanding children's hospitals with inpatient PPC programs were invited to complete a survey on OPPC. Self-selected participants were sent a follow-up survey soliciting free-text responses about development experiences. Quantitative data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Qualitative data underwent inductive content analysis. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Thirty-six hospitals completed the initial survey, and 28 (78%) reported practicing clinic-based OPPC. Twenty-two of 28 completed program development questions. More than half (12/22, 55%) recommended a minimum total billable full-time equivalent (FTE) ≥3 before expanding into the outpatient setting. About two-thirds (14/22, 64%) suggested a minimum billable FTE ≥4 for 24/7 coverage. Half (50%) reported that their program grew from subspecialty clinics, most frequently hematology-oncology (10/11, 91%). Half (50%) placed initial limits on referrals, with many restricting schedule availability (7/11, 64%). Six of 12 participants (50%) willing to share more about their development experience completed a follow-up survey, from which three themes emerged: program logistics, expectations and boundaries, and establishing role and workflow. Participants focused advice on slow programmatic growth to optimize sustainability. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Program leaders offer tangible guidance informed by their OPPC development experience. Future work is needed to leverage this advice within institutions to promote resilient and sustainable PPC growth.</p>","PeriodicalId":16656,"journal":{"name":"Journal of palliative medicine","volume":" ","pages":"1489-1496"},"PeriodicalIF":2.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Outpatient Pediatric Palliative Care Development: Guidance on Building Sustainable Programs.\",\"authors\":\"Casie James, Suraj Sarvode Mothi, Elissa G Miller, Erica C Kaye, Alexis Morvant, Caroline Stafford, Ashley K Autrey\",\"doi\":\"10.1089/jpm.2024.0148\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p><b><i>Context:</i></b> As pediatric palliative care (PPC) expands within institutions and nationally, little guidance is available on building outpatient programs. <b><i>Objectives:</i></b> We asked outpatient PPC (OPPC) program leaders in the United States about clinic development experiences to gather advice for growing programs. <b><i>Methods:</i></b> As part of a larger OPPC study, 48 freestanding children's hospitals with inpatient PPC programs were invited to complete a survey on OPPC. Self-selected participants were sent a follow-up survey soliciting free-text responses about development experiences. Quantitative data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Qualitative data underwent inductive content analysis. <b><i>Results:</i></b> Thirty-six hospitals completed the initial survey, and 28 (78%) reported practicing clinic-based OPPC. Twenty-two of 28 completed program development questions. More than half (12/22, 55%) recommended a minimum total billable full-time equivalent (FTE) ≥3 before expanding into the outpatient setting. About two-thirds (14/22, 64%) suggested a minimum billable FTE ≥4 for 24/7 coverage. Half (50%) reported that their program grew from subspecialty clinics, most frequently hematology-oncology (10/11, 91%). Half (50%) placed initial limits on referrals, with many restricting schedule availability (7/11, 64%). Six of 12 participants (50%) willing to share more about their development experience completed a follow-up survey, from which three themes emerged: program logistics, expectations and boundaries, and establishing role and workflow. Participants focused advice on slow programmatic growth to optimize sustainability. <b><i>Conclusion:</i></b> Program leaders offer tangible guidance informed by their OPPC development experience. Future work is needed to leverage this advice within institutions to promote resilient and sustainable PPC growth.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":16656,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Journal of palliative medicine\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1489-1496\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Journal of palliative medicine\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1089/jpm.2024.0148\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/8/21 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of palliative medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/jpm.2024.0148","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/8/21 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:随着儿科姑息关怀(PPC)在医疗机构和全国范围内的扩展,关于门诊项目建设的指导却少之又少。目标:我们向美国的门诊姑息关怀项目(OPPC)负责人询问了诊所的发展经验,为项目的发展收集建议。方法:作为一项大型 OPPC 研究的一部分,我们邀请了 48 家拥有 PPC 住院项目的独立儿童医院完成一项关于 OPPC 的调查。我们向自主选择的参与者发送了一份后续调查,征求他们对发展经验的自由文本回复。对定量数据进行了描述性统计分析。对定性数据进行归纳内容分析。结果:有 36 家医院完成了初步调查,其中 28 家(78%)报告说它们开展了以诊所为基础的 OPPC。28 家医院中有 22 家完成了项目开发问题。超过半数的医院(12/22,55%)建议在将业务扩展到门诊环境之前,至少要达到可收费全职当量(FTE)≥3。约三分之二(14/22,64%)的人建议,全天候服务的最低计费全职当量≥4。半数(50%)报告称,他们的项目是从亚专科诊所发展起来的,最常见的是血液肿瘤科(10/11,91%)。半数参与者(50%)对转诊进行了初步限制,其中许多人限制了时间安排(7/11,64%)。愿意分享更多发展经验的 12 位参与者中,有 6 位(50%)完成了后续调查,从中发现了三个主题:项目后勤、期望和界限,以及确立角色和工作流程。参与者主要建议计划缓慢增长,以优化可持续性。结论:计划领导者根据其 OPPC 的发展经验提供了切实可行的指导。今后需要开展工作,在各机构内利用这些建议,促进计划伙伴关系中心的弹性和可持续发展。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Outpatient Pediatric Palliative Care Development: Guidance on Building Sustainable Programs.

Context: As pediatric palliative care (PPC) expands within institutions and nationally, little guidance is available on building outpatient programs. Objectives: We asked outpatient PPC (OPPC) program leaders in the United States about clinic development experiences to gather advice for growing programs. Methods: As part of a larger OPPC study, 48 freestanding children's hospitals with inpatient PPC programs were invited to complete a survey on OPPC. Self-selected participants were sent a follow-up survey soliciting free-text responses about development experiences. Quantitative data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Qualitative data underwent inductive content analysis. Results: Thirty-six hospitals completed the initial survey, and 28 (78%) reported practicing clinic-based OPPC. Twenty-two of 28 completed program development questions. More than half (12/22, 55%) recommended a minimum total billable full-time equivalent (FTE) ≥3 before expanding into the outpatient setting. About two-thirds (14/22, 64%) suggested a minimum billable FTE ≥4 for 24/7 coverage. Half (50%) reported that their program grew from subspecialty clinics, most frequently hematology-oncology (10/11, 91%). Half (50%) placed initial limits on referrals, with many restricting schedule availability (7/11, 64%). Six of 12 participants (50%) willing to share more about their development experience completed a follow-up survey, from which three themes emerged: program logistics, expectations and boundaries, and establishing role and workflow. Participants focused advice on slow programmatic growth to optimize sustainability. Conclusion: Program leaders offer tangible guidance informed by their OPPC development experience. Future work is needed to leverage this advice within institutions to promote resilient and sustainable PPC growth.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Journal of palliative medicine
Journal of palliative medicine 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
3.90
自引率
10.70%
发文量
345
审稿时长
2 months
期刊介绍: Journal of Palliative Medicine is the premier peer-reviewed journal covering medical, psychosocial, policy, and legal issues in end-of-life care and relief of suffering for patients with intractable pain. The Journal presents essential information for professionals in hospice/palliative medicine, focusing on improving quality of life for patients and their families, and the latest developments in drug and non-drug treatments. The companion biweekly eNewsletter, Briefings in Palliative Medicine, delivers the latest breaking news and information to keep clinicians and health care providers continuously updated.
×
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