The specialist palliative care nurse: A qualitative study of the patients’ perspective

2006 ◽  
Vol 43 (8) ◽  
pp. 1011-1022 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alison Chapple ◽  
Sue Ziebland ◽  
Ann McPherson
2019 ◽  
Vol 33 (4) ◽  
pp. 430-444 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nicole Heneka ◽  
Priyanka Bhattarai ◽  
Tim Shaw ◽  
Debra Rowett ◽  
Samuel Lapkin ◽  
...  

Background: Opioid errors are a leading cause of patient harm and adversely impact palliative care inpatients’ pain and symptom management. Yet, the factors contributing to opioid errors in palliative care are poorly understood. Identifying and better understanding the individual and system factors contributing to these errors is required to inform targeted strategies. Objectives: To explore palliative care clinicians’ perceptions of the factors contributing to opioid errors in Australian inpatient palliative care services. Design: A qualitative study using focus groups or semi-structured interviews. Settings: Three specialist palliative care inpatient services in New South Wales, Australia. Participants: Inpatient palliative care clinicians who are involved with, and/or have oversight of, the services’ opioid delivery or quality and safety processes. Methods: Deductive thematic content analysis of the qualitative data. The Yorkshire Contributory Factors Framework was applied to identify error-contributing factors. Findings: A total of 58 clinicians participated in eight focus groups and 20 semi-structured interviews. Nine key error contributory factor domains were identified, including: active failures; task characteristics of opioid preparation; clinician inexperience; sub-optimal skill mix; gaps in support from central functions; the drug preparation environment; and sub-optimal clinical communication. Conclusion: This study identified multiple system-level factors contributing to opioid errors in inpatient palliative care services. Any quality and safety initiatives targeting safe opioid delivery in specialist palliative care services needs to consider the full range of contributing factors, from individual to systems/latent factors, which promote error-causing conditions.


2012 ◽  
Vol 2 (Suppl 1) ◽  
pp. A12.1-A12
Author(s):  
Catherine Hayle ◽  
Peter A Coventry ◽  
Stephanie Gomm ◽  
Ann-Louise Caress

2021 ◽  
pp. bmjspcare-2020-002865
Author(s):  
Anjali V Desai ◽  
Virginia M Klimek ◽  
Peter J Wan ◽  
Aileen Heinberg ◽  
Kelley L Anderson ◽  
...  

ObjectivesEvidence-based guidelines call for integration of palliative care within oncology from diagnosis. Misperceptions about palliative care have impeded implementation. Prior research has not examined perceptions about ‘palliative care’ versus ‘supportive care’ among patients and caregivers to whom this care is introduced routinely as part of comprehensive cancer care. We conducted a qualitative study of patients with myelodysplastic syndromes (MDS) and their informal caregivers to elicit perceptions of ‘palliative care’ and ‘supportive care’ before and after they received integrated primary/specialist palliative care from diagnosis.MethodsPatients with newly diagnosed MDS and caregivers were interviewed about their understanding of ‘palliative care’ and ‘supportive care’ at diagnosis and follow-up. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analysed by an interdisciplinary team.ResultsForty-eight interviews were conducted in total, including with 21 patients and 13 caregivers at diagnosis, and 10 patients and 4 caregivers at follow-up. Initially, 28/34 participants (82%) associated ‘palliative care’ with death or fear/alarm. At follow-up, 11/14 participants (79%) recognised that ‘palliative care’ is not only for terminally ill patients, yet 13/14 participants (93%) still felt apprehensive about the term. Initially, 24/34 participants (71%) felt ‘supportive care’ sounded ‘positive’ and 12/14 participants (86%) reported this at follow-up. No participant associated ‘supportive care’ with death or fear/alarm at either time point. Among participants who had a preference, ‘supportive care’ was the preferred term initially and at follow-up.ConclusionsPatients with MDS and caregivers receiving integrated primary/specialist palliative care from diagnosis responded more favourably to and felt less apprehensive about ‘supportive care’, initially and at follow-up.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document