Development of a palliative paramedicine framework to standardise best practice: A Delphi study.

IF 3.6 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Palliative Medicine Pub Date : 2024-09-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-14 DOI:10.1177/02692163241234004
Madeleine L Juhrmann, Phyllis N Butow, Paul Simpson, Mark Boughey, Meredith Makeham, Josephine M Clayton
{"title":"Development of a palliative paramedicine framework to standardise best practice: A Delphi study.","authors":"Madeleine L Juhrmann, Phyllis N Butow, Paul Simpson, Mark Boughey, Meredith Makeham, Josephine M Clayton","doi":"10.1177/02692163241234004","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Growing global demand for palliative care services has prompted generalist clinicians to provide adjunct support to specialist teams. Paramedics are uniquely placed to respond to these patients in the community. However, embedding palliative care principles into their core business will require multifactorial interventions at structural, healthcare service and individual clinician and consumer levels.</p><p><strong>Aim: </strong>To develop a palliative paramedicine framework suitable for national implementation, to standardise best practice in Australia.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Delphi study utilising questionnaire completion; each round informed the need for, and content of, the next round. Free text comments were also sought in Round 1. Two rounds of Delphi were undertaken.</p><p><strong>Setting/participants: </strong>Sixty-eight participants took part in Round 1, representing six countries, and 66 in Round 2. Participants included paramedics, palliative care doctors and nurses, general practitioners, researchers and carers with lived experience and expertise in palliative paramedicine.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Seventeen of the original 24 components gained consensus; 6 components were modified; and 9 new components arose from Round 1. All modified and new components gained consensus in Round 2. Only one original component did not gain consensus across both rounds and was excluded from the final 32-component framework.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>This study has developed a comprehensive national framework addressing the macro-, meso- and micro-level interventions required to standardise palliative paramedicine across Australia. Future research ought to engage a multidisciplinary team to create an implementation strategy, addressing any perceived barriers, facilitators and challenges for applying the framework into policy and practice.</p>","PeriodicalId":19849,"journal":{"name":"Palliative Medicine","volume":" ","pages":"853-873"},"PeriodicalIF":3.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11457439/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Palliative Medicine","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/02692163241234004","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/14 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Growing global demand for palliative care services has prompted generalist clinicians to provide adjunct support to specialist teams. Paramedics are uniquely placed to respond to these patients in the community. However, embedding palliative care principles into their core business will require multifactorial interventions at structural, healthcare service and individual clinician and consumer levels.

Aim: To develop a palliative paramedicine framework suitable for national implementation, to standardise best practice in Australia.

Design: Delphi study utilising questionnaire completion; each round informed the need for, and content of, the next round. Free text comments were also sought in Round 1. Two rounds of Delphi were undertaken.

Setting/participants: Sixty-eight participants took part in Round 1, representing six countries, and 66 in Round 2. Participants included paramedics, palliative care doctors and nurses, general practitioners, researchers and carers with lived experience and expertise in palliative paramedicine.

Results: Seventeen of the original 24 components gained consensus; 6 components were modified; and 9 new components arose from Round 1. All modified and new components gained consensus in Round 2. Only one original component did not gain consensus across both rounds and was excluded from the final 32-component framework.

Conclusion: This study has developed a comprehensive national framework addressing the macro-, meso- and micro-level interventions required to standardise palliative paramedicine across Australia. Future research ought to engage a multidisciplinary team to create an implementation strategy, addressing any perceived barriers, facilitators and challenges for applying the framework into policy and practice.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
制定姑息治疗辅助医疗框架,实现最佳实践标准化:德尔菲研究。
背景:全球对姑息关怀服务的需求不断增长,促使全科临床医生为专科团队提供辅助支持。辅助医务人员在应对社区病人方面具有得天独厚的优势。然而,要将姑息关怀原则纳入其核心业务,需要在结构、医疗保健服务以及临床医生和消费者个人层面采取多因素干预措施。目的:制定适合在全国范围内实施的姑息辅助医疗框架,以规范澳大利亚的最佳实践:设计:利用填写问卷的方式进行德尔菲研究;每一轮研究都为下一轮研究的需求和内容提供参考。第一轮研究还征求了自由文本意见:第一轮有 68 人参加,代表 6 个国家,第二轮有 66 人参加。参与者包括辅助医疗人员、姑息治疗医生和护士、全科医生、研究人员以及在姑息治疗辅助医疗方面具有生活经验和专业知识的护理人员:结果:在最初的 24 项内容中,17 项获得了共识;6 项内容进行了修改;9 项新内容产生于第一轮。 所有修改过的和新的内容在第二轮中都获得了共识。只有一个原始组成部分在两轮中均未获得共识,被排除在最终的 32 个组成部分框架之外:本研究制定了一个全面的国家框架,涉及宏观、中观和微观层面的干预措施,以实现澳大利亚姑息治疗辅助医疗的标准化。未来的研究应该让多学科团队参与进来,制定实施策略,解决将该框架应用于政策和实践过程中遇到的障碍、促进因素和挑战。
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 去求助
来源期刊
Palliative Medicine
Palliative Medicine 医学-公共卫生、环境卫生与职业卫生
CiteScore
7.60
自引率
9.10%
发文量
125
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: Palliative Medicine is a highly ranked, peer reviewed scholarly journal dedicated to improving knowledge and clinical practice in the palliative care of patients with far advanced disease. This outstanding journal features editorials, original papers, review articles, case reports, correspondence and book reviews. Essential reading for all members of the palliative care team. This journal is a member of the Committee on Publication Ethics (COPE).
期刊最新文献
Working with people living with motor neurone disease and the impact on professionals' emotional and psychological well-being: A scoping review. A scoping review of global patterns in reporting race, ethnicity, nationality, or religion in palliative care randomized controlled trials: Recommendations for transparency. Changes in perception of prognosis in the last year of life of patients with advanced cancer and its associated factors: Longitudinal results of the eQuiPe study. Challenges of regional hospice and palliative care networks: A group discussion study with coordinators and network experts. Community out-of-hours palliative care - 'It's a patchwork of services': A qualitative study exploring care provision.
×
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
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 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 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1