解决比利时姑息关怀组织中的整合问题:使用层次分析法(AHP)的多层次生态系统方法。

IF 2.5 2区 医学 Q2 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES BMC Palliative Care Pub Date : 2024-10-26 DOI:10.1186/s12904-024-01585-2
Melissa De Regge, Paul Gemmel, Leen Ackaert, Let Dillen, Peter Pype, Nele Van Den Noortgate, Bert Meijboom, Kristof Eeckloo
{"title":"解决比利时姑息关怀组织中的整合问题:使用层次分析法(AHP)的多层次生态系统方法。","authors":"Melissa De Regge, Paul Gemmel, Leen Ackaert, Let Dillen, Peter Pype, Nele Van Den Noortgate, Bert Meijboom, Kristof Eeckloo","doi":"10.1186/s12904-024-01585-2","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Palliative care is becoming an essential component of healthcare, but there is insufficient research on how integration across different levels of care (micro, meso, and macro) is realized in practice. Without such integration, care may become fragmented, leading to suboptimal patient outcomes. While many studies have explored palliative care models, there is a gap in understanding how priorities for integrated care align across these levels within healthcare ecosystems. Specifically, it is unclear whether key actions at each level are shared, coordinated, and supported effectively, making it difficult to implement sustainable, cohesive care strategies. Our study aims to explore the extent to which important goals (i.e., priorities) are shared across the micro, meso, and macro levels of the palliative care ecosystem in Flanders, Belgium.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We applied a multimethod study using the analytic hierarchy process method (AHP). This consists of three sequential steps: a broad literature search and interviews with Belgian stakeholders (n = 12) to determine the criteria for the organization of integrated care; focus groups (n = 8) with patients, their relatives and caregivers to establish the completeness and relevance of the criteria; and prioritization of the criteria using a questionnaire among 305 Flemish participants (patients, relatives, caregivers and policy makers).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our findings revealed that integration is imbalanced, with priorities being most emphasized at the micro level (57%), followed by the meso (29%) and macro (14%) level. Functional enablers dominate at the macro (80%) and meso organizational level (67%), while normative enablers are emphasized at the meso professional (67%) and micro level (75%). Effective palliative care requires vertical coordination of these enablers: for instance, transparent communication with patients at the micro level depends on cross-organizational information exchange at the meso level, supported by a unified data system at the macro level.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Achieving integrated palliative care requires deliberate alignment of priorities across all levels of the ecosystem. While each level plays a unique role, palliative care is comprehensive and effective only by sharing both functional and normative enablers across micro, meso, and macro level.</p>","PeriodicalId":48945,"journal":{"name":"BMC Palliative Care","volume":"23 1","pages":"250"},"PeriodicalIF":2.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-26","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11515222/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Addressing integration in the organization of palliative care in belgium: a multilevel ecosystems approach using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method.\",\"authors\":\"Melissa De Regge, Paul Gemmel, Leen Ackaert, Let Dillen, Peter Pype, Nele Van Den Noortgate, Bert Meijboom, Kristof Eeckloo\",\"doi\":\"10.1186/s12904-024-01585-2\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Palliative care is becoming an essential component of healthcare, but there is insufficient research on how integration across different levels of care (micro, meso, and macro) is realized in practice. Without such integration, care may become fragmented, leading to suboptimal patient outcomes. While many studies have explored palliative care models, there is a gap in understanding how priorities for integrated care align across these levels within healthcare ecosystems. Specifically, it is unclear whether key actions at each level are shared, coordinated, and supported effectively, making it difficult to implement sustainable, cohesive care strategies. Our study aims to explore the extent to which important goals (i.e., priorities) are shared across the micro, meso, and macro levels of the palliative care ecosystem in Flanders, Belgium.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We applied a multimethod study using the analytic hierarchy process method (AHP). This consists of three sequential steps: a broad literature search and interviews with Belgian stakeholders (n = 12) to determine the criteria for the organization of integrated care; focus groups (n = 8) with patients, their relatives and caregivers to establish the completeness and relevance of the criteria; and prioritization of the criteria using a questionnaire among 305 Flemish participants (patients, relatives, caregivers and policy makers).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Our findings revealed that integration is imbalanced, with priorities being most emphasized at the micro level (57%), followed by the meso (29%) and macro (14%) level. Functional enablers dominate at the macro (80%) and meso organizational level (67%), while normative enablers are emphasized at the meso professional (67%) and micro level (75%). Effective palliative care requires vertical coordination of these enablers: for instance, transparent communication with patients at the micro level depends on cross-organizational information exchange at the meso level, supported by a unified data system at the macro level.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Achieving integrated palliative care requires deliberate alignment of priorities across all levels of the ecosystem. While each level plays a unique role, palliative care is comprehensive and effective only by sharing both functional and normative enablers across micro, meso, and macro level.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":48945,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"BMC Palliative Care\",\"volume\":\"23 1\",\"pages\":\"250\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-26\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11515222/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"BMC Palliative Care\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12904-024-01585-2\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"BMC Palliative Care","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s12904-024-01585-2","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:姑息关怀正成为医疗保健的重要组成部分,但对于如何在实践中实现不同层面(微观、中观和宏观)的关怀整合,研究还不够充分。如果没有这种整合,护理可能会变得支离破碎,从而导致患者的治疗效果不理想。虽然许多研究都对姑息关怀模式进行了探讨,但在了解医疗保健生态系统中整合关怀的优先事项如何在这些层面上保持一致方面还存在差距。具体来说,目前还不清楚各个层面的关键行动是否得到了有效的共享、协调和支持,因此很难实施可持续的、具有凝聚力的护理策略。我们的研究旨在探索比利时佛兰德斯姑息关怀生态系统的微观、中观和宏观层面在多大程度上共享重要目标(即优先事项):我们采用层次分析法(AHP)进行了多方法研究。这包括三个连续步骤:广泛的文献检索和对比利时利益相关者的访谈(n = 12),以确定组织整合护理的标准;与患者、患者亲属和护理人员的焦点小组(n = 8),以确定标准的完整性和相关性;以及通过对 305 名佛兰德参与者(患者、亲属、护理人员和政策制定者)进行问卷调查,确定标准的优先次序:结果:我们的研究结果表明,整合是不平衡的,微观层面(57%)最受重视,其次是中观层面(29%)和宏观层面(14%)。功能性促进因素在宏观(80%)和中观组织层面(67%)占主导地位,而规范性促进因素则在中观专业层面(67%)和微观层面(75%)受到重视。有效的姑息关怀需要这些促进因素的纵向协调:例如,微观层面上与患者的透明沟通取决于中观层面上的跨组织信息交流,并得到宏观层面上统一数据系统的支持:实现一体化姑息关怀需要有意识地调整生态系统各个层面的优先事项。虽然每个层面都发挥着独特的作用,但只有在微观、中观和宏观层面共享功能性和规范性的促进因素,姑息关怀才能全面有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Addressing integration in the organization of palliative care in belgium: a multilevel ecosystems approach using the analytic hierarchy process (AHP) method.

Background: Palliative care is becoming an essential component of healthcare, but there is insufficient research on how integration across different levels of care (micro, meso, and macro) is realized in practice. Without such integration, care may become fragmented, leading to suboptimal patient outcomes. While many studies have explored palliative care models, there is a gap in understanding how priorities for integrated care align across these levels within healthcare ecosystems. Specifically, it is unclear whether key actions at each level are shared, coordinated, and supported effectively, making it difficult to implement sustainable, cohesive care strategies. Our study aims to explore the extent to which important goals (i.e., priorities) are shared across the micro, meso, and macro levels of the palliative care ecosystem in Flanders, Belgium.

Methods: We applied a multimethod study using the analytic hierarchy process method (AHP). This consists of three sequential steps: a broad literature search and interviews with Belgian stakeholders (n = 12) to determine the criteria for the organization of integrated care; focus groups (n = 8) with patients, their relatives and caregivers to establish the completeness and relevance of the criteria; and prioritization of the criteria using a questionnaire among 305 Flemish participants (patients, relatives, caregivers and policy makers).

Results: Our findings revealed that integration is imbalanced, with priorities being most emphasized at the micro level (57%), followed by the meso (29%) and macro (14%) level. Functional enablers dominate at the macro (80%) and meso organizational level (67%), while normative enablers are emphasized at the meso professional (67%) and micro level (75%). Effective palliative care requires vertical coordination of these enablers: for instance, transparent communication with patients at the micro level depends on cross-organizational information exchange at the meso level, supported by a unified data system at the macro level.

Conclusion: Achieving integrated palliative care requires deliberate alignment of priorities across all levels of the ecosystem. While each level plays a unique role, palliative care is comprehensive and effective only by sharing both functional and normative enablers across micro, meso, and macro level.

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
BMC Palliative Care
BMC Palliative Care HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES-
CiteScore
4.60
自引率
9.70%
发文量
201
审稿时长
21 weeks
期刊介绍: BMC Palliative Care is an open access journal publishing original peer-reviewed research articles in the clinical, scientific, ethical and policy issues, local and international, regarding all aspects of hospice and palliative care for the dying and for those with profound suffering related to chronic illness.
期刊最新文献
Communication about incurable illness and remaining life between spouses and patients with incurable illness receiving specialized home care: effects of a family caregiver-targeted web-based psycho-educational intervention. Correction: Adapting the serious illness conversation guide for unhoused older adults: a rapid qualitative study. Online education in palliative care - A national exploratory multimethod study. The family talk intervention prevent the feeling of loneliness - a long term follow up after a parents life-threatening illness. Is the use of antibiotic stewardship measures in the context of specialized outpatient palliative care sensible and feasible? An interview-based study.
×
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