对急症儿童进行门诊护理的安全网建议:通过焦点小组访谈探讨家长的意见、想法和期望。

IF 2.6 Q2 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
Ruben Burvenich, Stefan Heytens, David A G Bos, Kaatje Van Roy, Thomas Struyf, Jaan Toelen, An De Sutter, Jan Y Verbakel
{"title":"对急症儿童进行门诊护理的安全网建议:通过焦点小组访谈探讨家长的意见、想法和期望。","authors":"Ruben Burvenich, Stefan Heytens, David A G Bos, Kaatje Van Roy, Thomas Struyf, Jaan Toelen, An De Sutter, Jan Y Verbakel","doi":"10.1186/s12875-025-02803-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Safety netting advice (SNA) is an essential component of the management of acutely ill children in ambulatory care. However, healthcare professionals use a variety of SNA methods, leading to inconsistencies within and across organisations. Much research has explored the perspective on SNA of parents from the UK, but such research is lacking outside the UK context.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted focus groups with Belgian parents of children 6 months to 12 years old, who were recruited through maximum variation sampling. We transcribed the interviews verbatim. Using a combination of inductive and deductive 'in vivo' coding we developed themes from the data. As per the Grounded Theory approach, we reiterated between data collection, coding, and analysis. After participant validation of provisional themes, we constructed the final thematic framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Through six focus groups with 30 parents, we identified five themes: (1) Relevant background information; (2) To know what to expect, what to look out for; (3) Instructions on child homecare and when to revisit a physician; (4) Physicians who consider parents' perspectives and contexts; (5) A reliable source that provides SNA only when necessary, possibly in a multimodal way.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We identified five themes from Belgian parents' views on SNA, aligning with prior UK research. These findings form an evidence base for developing a consensus statement on the content and form of SNA supported by both parents and experts from high-income countries.</p>","PeriodicalId":72428,"journal":{"name":"BMC primary care","volume":"26 1","pages":"135"},"PeriodicalIF":2.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12036273/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Safety netting advice for acutely ill children presenting to ambulatory care: exploring parents' opinions, ideas, and expectations through focus group interviews.\",\"authors\":\"Ruben Burvenich, Stefan Heytens, David A G Bos, Kaatje Van Roy, Thomas Struyf, Jaan Toelen, An De Sutter, Jan Y Verbakel\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12875-025-02803-3\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Safety netting advice (SNA) is an essential component of the management of acutely ill children in ambulatory care. However, healthcare professionals use a variety of SNA methods, leading to inconsistencies within and across organisations. Much research has explored the perspective on SNA of parents from the UK, but such research is lacking outside the UK context.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted focus groups with Belgian parents of children 6 months to 12 years old, who were recruited through maximum variation sampling. We transcribed the interviews verbatim. Using a combination of inductive and deductive 'in vivo' coding we developed themes from the data. As per the Grounded Theory approach, we reiterated between data collection, coding, and analysis. After participant validation of provisional themes, we constructed the final thematic framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Through six focus groups with 30 parents, we identified five themes: (1) Relevant background information; (2) To know what to expect, what to look out for; (3) Instructions on child homecare and when to revisit a physician; (4) Physicians who consider parents' perspectives and contexts; (5) A reliable source that provides SNA only when necessary, possibly in a multimodal way.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>We identified five themes from Belgian parents' views on SNA, aligning with prior UK research. These findings form an evidence base for developing a consensus statement on the content and form of SNA supported by both parents and experts from high-income countries.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72428,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC primary care\",\"volume\":\"26 1\",\"pages\":\"135\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-28\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12036273/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC primary care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-025-02803-3\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC primary care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12875-025-02803-3","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:安全网建议(SNA)是急性患儿门诊护理管理的重要组成部分。然而,医疗保健专业人员使用各种SNA方法,导致组织内部和组织之间的不一致。许多研究探索了来自英国的父母SNA的视角,但这类研究缺乏英国以外的背景。方法:采用最大变异抽样法,对6个月至12岁儿童的比利时父母进行焦点小组调查。我们一字不差地把采访记录下来。结合归纳和演绎的“体内”编码,我们从数据中开发主题。根据扎根理论的方法,我们在数据收集、编码和分析之间反复强调。在参与者对临时主题进行验证后,我们构建了最终的主题框架。结果:通过6组30名家长的焦点小组,我们确定了5个主题:(1)相关背景信息;(2)知道该期待什么,该注意什么;(3)关于儿童家庭护理和何时去看医生的说明;(4)考虑父母观点和背景的医生;(5)仅在必要时提供SNA的可靠来源,可能以多式联运方式提供。结论:我们从比利时父母对SNA的看法中确定了五个主题,与先前的英国研究一致。这些发现形成了一个证据基础,为家长和高收入国家专家共同支持的关于SNA内容和形式的共识声明提供了依据。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Safety netting advice for acutely ill children presenting to ambulatory care: exploring parents' opinions, ideas, and expectations through focus group interviews.

Background: Safety netting advice (SNA) is an essential component of the management of acutely ill children in ambulatory care. However, healthcare professionals use a variety of SNA methods, leading to inconsistencies within and across organisations. Much research has explored the perspective on SNA of parents from the UK, but such research is lacking outside the UK context.

Methods: We conducted focus groups with Belgian parents of children 6 months to 12 years old, who were recruited through maximum variation sampling. We transcribed the interviews verbatim. Using a combination of inductive and deductive 'in vivo' coding we developed themes from the data. As per the Grounded Theory approach, we reiterated between data collection, coding, and analysis. After participant validation of provisional themes, we constructed the final thematic framework.

Results: Through six focus groups with 30 parents, we identified five themes: (1) Relevant background information; (2) To know what to expect, what to look out for; (3) Instructions on child homecare and when to revisit a physician; (4) Physicians who consider parents' perspectives and contexts; (5) A reliable source that provides SNA only when necessary, possibly in a multimodal way.

Conclusions: We identified five themes from Belgian parents' views on SNA, aligning with prior UK research. These findings form an evidence base for developing a consensus statement on the content and form of SNA supported by both parents and experts from high-income countries.

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
CiteScore
4.40
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