Key informants' perceptions of telehealth palliative care for people living with dementia in nursing homes.

IF 3.8 2区 医学 Q2 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY BMC Geriatrics Pub Date : 2025-03-19 DOI:10.1186/s12877-025-05820-0
Joan G Carpenter, Laura C Hanson, George Demiris, Nancy Hodgson, Mary Ersek
{"title":"Key informants' perceptions of telehealth palliative care for people living with dementia in nursing homes.","authors":"Joan G Carpenter, Laura C Hanson, George Demiris, Nancy Hodgson, Mary Ersek","doi":"10.1186/s12877-025-05820-0","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Studies have shown that palliative care delivered to people living with dementia (PLWD) in nursing homes (NHs) improves care quality and reduces potentially burdensome treatments. However, access to palliative care services in NHs is uncommon. Telehealth may extend the reach of specialty palliative care consultation, yet strategies for feasible and acceptable NH implementation remain unknown. During implementation of an embedded pragmatic pilot clinical trial for PLWD, we aimed to describe key informants' perceptions of a NH telehealth palliative care intervention.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Guided by the Practical Implementation Sustainability Model (PRISM), we engaged key informants in 30-60-minute focus groups and individual semi-structured interviews to understand barriers and facilitators to implementation of a NH telehealth palliative care intervention in one NH. Interview prompts addressed contextual factors that influenced outcomes. Interviews were conducted and recorded via videoconference, transcribed, and analyzed using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Participants (n = 14) included NH administrators and other leaders, palliative care providers, telehealth representatives, dementia advocates, a care partner, and a PLWD. Identified barriers to implementation included stigma surrounding dementia, palliative care, and NHs; multiple logistical pieces required to implement the intervention; inflexibility of palliative care providers to meet NH needs; and inability to assess residents in person. Facilitators included convenient, user-friendly and readily available telehealth equipment, and NH staff presence during visits. Outcomes most relevant to the key informants were increased goals of care conversations, improved symptom management and quality of life, and decreased health care utilization. Suggested adaptations included increased family engagement in the logistics of the intervention and strong NH advocacy.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>In this study, key informants provided feedback that barriers to implementing NH telehealth palliative care far outweighed the facilitators for uptake. Future work will focus on employing NH staff in user centered design to overcome barriers such as optimal timing for consults and/or scheduled consult days to fit NH workflow, assessing organizational readiness for implementing change, and identifying dementia-specific and palliative care education needs.</p>","PeriodicalId":9056,"journal":{"name":"BMC Geriatrics","volume":"25 1","pages":"187"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-03-19","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11921693/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Geriatrics","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-025-05820-0","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Studies have shown that palliative care delivered to people living with dementia (PLWD) in nursing homes (NHs) improves care quality and reduces potentially burdensome treatments. However, access to palliative care services in NHs is uncommon. Telehealth may extend the reach of specialty palliative care consultation, yet strategies for feasible and acceptable NH implementation remain unknown. During implementation of an embedded pragmatic pilot clinical trial for PLWD, we aimed to describe key informants' perceptions of a NH telehealth palliative care intervention.

Methods: Guided by the Practical Implementation Sustainability Model (PRISM), we engaged key informants in 30-60-minute focus groups and individual semi-structured interviews to understand barriers and facilitators to implementation of a NH telehealth palliative care intervention in one NH. Interview prompts addressed contextual factors that influenced outcomes. Interviews were conducted and recorded via videoconference, transcribed, and analyzed using the Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance (RE-AIM) framework.

Results: Participants (n = 14) included NH administrators and other leaders, palliative care providers, telehealth representatives, dementia advocates, a care partner, and a PLWD. Identified barriers to implementation included stigma surrounding dementia, palliative care, and NHs; multiple logistical pieces required to implement the intervention; inflexibility of palliative care providers to meet NH needs; and inability to assess residents in person. Facilitators included convenient, user-friendly and readily available telehealth equipment, and NH staff presence during visits. Outcomes most relevant to the key informants were increased goals of care conversations, improved symptom management and quality of life, and decreased health care utilization. Suggested adaptations included increased family engagement in the logistics of the intervention and strong NH advocacy.

Conclusions: In this study, key informants provided feedback that barriers to implementing NH telehealth palliative care far outweighed the facilitators for uptake. Future work will focus on employing NH staff in user centered design to overcome barriers such as optimal timing for consults and/or scheduled consult days to fit NH workflow, assessing organizational readiness for implementing change, and identifying dementia-specific and palliative care education needs.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

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
关键信息提供者对在养老院为痴呆症患者提供远程医疗姑息治疗的看法。
背景:研究表明,在养老院(NHs)向痴呆症患者(PLWD)提供姑息治疗可以提高护理质量,减少潜在的繁重治疗。然而,在国民保健制度中获得姑息治疗服务并不常见。远程医疗可以扩展专业姑息治疗咨询的范围,但可行和可接受的NH实施策略仍然未知。在实施PLWD嵌入式实用试点临床试验期间,我们旨在描述关键线人对NH远程医疗姑息治疗干预的看法。方法:在实际实施可持续性模型(PRISM)的指导下,我们在30-60分钟的焦点小组和个人半结构化访谈中邀请关键信息提供者了解在一家NH实施远程医疗姑息治疗干预的障碍和促进因素。面试提示解决了影响结果的环境因素。访谈是通过视频会议进行和记录的,并使用Reach、有效性、采用、实施和维护(RE-AIM)框架进行转录和分析。结果:参与者(n = 14)包括NH管理人员和其他领导、姑息治疗提供者、远程医疗代表、痴呆症倡导者、护理伙伴和PLWD。确定的实施障碍包括围绕痴呆症、姑息治疗和NHs的耻辱感;实施干预所需的多个后勤部分;姑息治疗提供者在满足新卫生保健需求方面缺乏灵活性;也无法亲自对居民进行评估。便利条件包括方便、用户友好和随时可用的远程保健设备,以及在访问期间NH工作人员在场。与关键信息提供者最相关的结果是增加了护理谈话的目标,改善了症状管理和生活质量,降低了医疗保健利用率。建议的适应措施包括增加家庭参与干预的后勤工作和大力宣传新卫生保健。结论:在本研究中,关键信息提供者提供的反馈表明,实施NH远程医疗姑息治疗的障碍远远超过了促进采用的因素。未来的工作将集中在以用户为中心的设计中雇用NH员工,以克服障碍,例如咨询的最佳时间和/或预定的咨询天数,以适应NH的工作流程,评估组织实施变革的准备情况,以及确定痴呆症特定和姑息治疗教育需求。
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
BMC Geriatrics
BMC Geriatrics GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY-
CiteScore
5.70
自引率
7.30%
发文量
873
审稿时长
20 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Geriatrics is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in all aspects of the health and healthcare of older people, including the effects of healthcare systems and policies. The journal also welcomes research focused on the aging process, including cellular, genetic, and physiological processes and cognitive modifications.
期刊最新文献
Community-based interventions for cognitive health in older adults: a scoping review. Developing a culturally appropriate core competency training curriculum for eating support healthcare aides: a modified Delphi study. Perturbation-based balance training on treadmills for falls prevention in older adults: a review of training protocols and reporting recommendations (ProRePBT). Predicting long-term hospital outcomes in older adults with the hospital frailty risk score: a nationwide study of repeated readmissions. Serum inflammatory markers and total antioxidant capacity in relation to sleep outcome in the elderly.
×
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:604180095
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