Division of Primary Care and Population Health, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California, USA
Center for Innovation to Implementation (Ci2i), VA Palo Alto Health Care System, Palo Alto, California, USA.
BMJ Open. 2024 Jan 17;14(1):e076768. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2023-076768.
To compare the discussions from two panels on the concept of palliative care quality for patients with advanced cancer, exploring the priorities reflected in each group's perspectives.
We convened two RAND-UCLA appropriateness panel discussions on palliative care quality in advanced cancer. Discussions were audio-recorded and transcribed verbatim. Panel transcripts were analysed thematically using a matrix approach to examine perceptions and experiences of quality.
Discussions were framed within the context of advanced cancer care and palliative care.
The patient-caregiver panel had 9 patients with current or a history of cancer and caregivers, and the practitioner panel had 10 expert practitioners representing fields of oncology, primary care, social work, palliative care, nursing, pain management and ethics.
Our analysis identified three thematic categories for understanding quality common across both groups and nine subthemes within those categories. At the highest level, quality was conceived as: (1) the patient and caregiver experience of care, (2) technical competence and (3) the structure of health system. Among the subthemes, four were present in only one of the two group's discussions: 'purpose and action' was specific to the patient-caregiver panel, whereas 'adhering to best medical practice', 'mitigating unintended consequences and side effects', and 'health system resources and costs' were specific to the practitioner panel.
While both panels aligned on the three key domains of quality, the particular dimensions through which they perceived quality varied in relation to their experience and role as a professional provider of care versus recipient of healthcare services. These differences suggest the importance of adopting a collaborative approach to quality measurement and improvement so that the values of all interested parties are represented in improvement efforts.
比较两个小组对晚期癌症患者姑息治疗质量概念的讨论,探讨每个小组观点反映的重点。
我们召集了两个 RAND-UCLA 姑息治疗质量适当性小组讨论。讨论内容被录音并逐字记录。使用矩阵方法对小组记录进行主题分析,以检查对质量的看法和经验。
讨论是在晚期癌症护理和姑息治疗的背景下进行的。
患者-照顾者小组有 9 名目前或曾患有癌症的患者和照顾者,以及 10 名代表肿瘤学、初级保健、社会工作、姑息治疗、护理、疼痛管理和伦理学领域的专家从业者的从业者小组。
我们的分析确定了两组共同理解质量的三个主题类别和这些类别中的九个子主题。在最高层次上,质量被认为是:(1)患者和照顾者的护理体验,(2)技术能力和(3)卫生系统结构。在子主题中,有四个仅存在于两个小组讨论中的一个:“目的和行动”是患者-照顾者小组特有的,而“遵守最佳医疗实践”、“减轻意外后果和副作用”以及“卫生系统资源和成本”是从业者小组特有的。
虽然两个小组都在质量的三个关键领域达成一致,但它们感知质量的特定维度因作为护理提供者的经验和角色与作为医疗服务接受者的经验和角色而异。这些差异表明,采用协作方法进行质量衡量和改进非常重要,以便在改进工作中代表所有利益相关方的价值观。