Palliative Care Clinicians' Perspectives of an Integrated Caregiver Patient-Portal System in Oncology.

M. Longacre, Marcin Chwistek, M. Collins, Michelle Odelberg, Mark Siemon, Cindy A. Keleher, C. Fang
{"title":"Palliative Care Clinicians' Perspectives of an Integrated Caregiver Patient-Portal System in Oncology.","authors":"M. Longacre, Marcin Chwistek, M. Collins, Michelle Odelberg, Mark Siemon, Cindy A. Keleher, C. Fang","doi":"10.1097/cr9.0000000000000014","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background\nDespite recommendations and policies to integrate family caregivers into U.S. healthcare settings, caregivers are not systematically involved. Thus, we developed an Integrated Caregiver Patient-Portal system that (1) allows a patient to identify their primary caregiver and their communication preferences; (2) connects the caregiver to a unique portal page to indicate their needs; and 3) informs the care team of dyad responses to aid in integrating the caregiver.\n\n\nObjective\nThis formative research explored palliative care clinicians' perceptions of the system to inform refinements before usability testing.\n\n\nMethods\nWe conducted two focus groups with palliative care clinicians (N=11) at an NCI-designated cancer center. Transcripts were analyzed using an integrated approach to specify system benefits and concerns.\n\n\nResults\nThe most referenced benefits included: Learning information that they might not have known without the system; giving caregivers a voice or a way to express needs; and supporting an ideal model of care. Top concerns included lacking capacity to respond; needing to clarify clinician roles and expertise in responding to caregivers' needs; and ensuring ongoing system adaptability.\n\n\nConclusions\nThe clinicians' feedback resulted in revisions including: (1) modifying the caregiver questions; (2) integrating social workers in the response; and (3) adding a text-based report to the care team.\n\n\nImplications for Practice\nThis formative research provided valuable feedback for portal development, and also contributes more broadly to recommendations related to integrating caregivers in healthcare.\n\n\nFoundational\nThis research provides practical and logistical relevance to the discussion on how to integrate caregivers into clinical care.","PeriodicalId":72506,"journal":{"name":"Cancer care research online","volume":"1 4 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Cancer care research online","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/cr9.0000000000000014","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background Despite recommendations and policies to integrate family caregivers into U.S. healthcare settings, caregivers are not systematically involved. Thus, we developed an Integrated Caregiver Patient-Portal system that (1) allows a patient to identify their primary caregiver and their communication preferences; (2) connects the caregiver to a unique portal page to indicate their needs; and 3) informs the care team of dyad responses to aid in integrating the caregiver. Objective This formative research explored palliative care clinicians' perceptions of the system to inform refinements before usability testing. Methods We conducted two focus groups with palliative care clinicians (N=11) at an NCI-designated cancer center. Transcripts were analyzed using an integrated approach to specify system benefits and concerns. Results The most referenced benefits included: Learning information that they might not have known without the system; giving caregivers a voice or a way to express needs; and supporting an ideal model of care. Top concerns included lacking capacity to respond; needing to clarify clinician roles and expertise in responding to caregivers' needs; and ensuring ongoing system adaptability. Conclusions The clinicians' feedback resulted in revisions including: (1) modifying the caregiver questions; (2) integrating social workers in the response; and (3) adding a text-based report to the care team. Implications for Practice This formative research provided valuable feedback for portal development, and also contributes more broadly to recommendations related to integrating caregivers in healthcare. Foundational This research provides practical and logistical relevance to the discussion on how to integrate caregivers into clinical care.
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
姑息治疗临床医生对肿瘤科综合护理-患者门户系统的看法。
背景尽管有将家庭护理人员纳入美国医疗环境的建议和政策,但护理人员并没有系统地参与其中。因此,我们开发了一个综合护理人员-患者门户系统,该系统(1)允许患者识别其主要护理人员及其沟通偏好;(2) 将护理人员连接到唯一的门户页面,以指示他们的需求;以及3)将二元反应通知护理团队以帮助整合护理者。目的这项形成性研究探讨了姑息治疗临床医生对该系统的看法,以便在可用性测试之前进行改进。方法我们在NCI指定的癌症中心与姑息治疗临床医生(N=11)进行了两个焦点小组。使用综合方法对转录本进行分析,以明确系统的益处和关注点。结果被引用最多的好处包括:学习没有系统他们可能不知道的信息;让照顾者有发言权或表达需求的方式;以及支持理想的护理模式。最令人关切的问题包括缺乏应对能力;需要澄清临床医生在满足照顾者需求方面的作用和专业知识;以及确保持续的系统适应性。结论临床医生的反馈导致了修订,包括:(1)修改护理者问题;(2) 将社会工作者纳入应对措施;以及(3)向护理团队添加基于文本的报告。对实践的启示这项形成性研究为门户网站的开发提供了宝贵的反馈,也为将护理人员纳入医疗保健的相关建议做出了更广泛的贡献。基础这项研究为如何将护理人员融入临床护理的讨论提供了实际和后勤方面的相关性。
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
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Nutritional Status, Eating Behaviors, and Gastrointestinal Symptom Cluster Among Children Receiving Cancer Chemotherapy in Thailand: A Descriptive Study Electricity Availability and Relevance for Oncology Nursing Coping in Women With Breast Cancer Awaiting a Surgical Intervention: A Cross-Sectional Study Mobility Is Medicine, Too: Creating a Culture of Mobility Amongst Hospitalized Patients With Cancer to Improve Patient Outcomes Long-term Cancer Survivorship: A Family Affair
×
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