Conducting Research in Palliative Care as Viewed by Interprofessional Care Teams: Insights from a Cross-Sectional Survey.

IF 1.3 Q4 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES Palliative medicine reports Pub Date : 2025-06-25 eCollection Date: 2025-01-01 DOI:10.1089/pmr.2024.0099
Coralie Roux, Sophie Pautex, Federica Bianchi, Lisa Hentsch
{"title":"Conducting Research in Palliative Care as Viewed by Interprofessional Care Teams: Insights from a Cross-Sectional Survey.","authors":"Coralie Roux, Sophie Pautex, Federica Bianchi, Lisa Hentsch","doi":"10.1089/pmr.2024.0099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>Conducting studies in palliative care can be challenging. It has been highlighted that the interprofessional team may have their own reasons for not engaging in research projects. We aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to the involvement of palliative care team members in research projects.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>We used a cross-sectional online survey with qualitative and quantitative components to identify barriers and facilitators encountered by palliative care health professionals. Participants were physicians, nurses, nurse assistants, physiotherapists, dieticians, and occupational therapists working in the Division of Palliative Medicine of the Geneva University Hospitals in Switzerland. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and content analysis for the open-ended questions.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 107 questionnaires were sent, and 51 participants (48%) provided responses, of whom 75% expressed an interest in research, although only 47% had previously taken part in a research project. The most cited barriers were a lack of training on how to conduct studies, a lack of time, and a lack of funding. The main facilitators were the recognition that research enhances the quality of care and the belief that patients should be respected in their autonomy and given the opportunity to participate in research projects.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>The interprofessional palliative care team would benefit from time, funds, and training in order to enhance a research culture within the team. The establishment of an interprofessional network to guide and share experiences would also be a good way to promote this culture.</p>","PeriodicalId":74394,"journal":{"name":"Palliative medicine reports","volume":"6 1","pages":"374-381"},"PeriodicalIF":1.3000,"publicationDate":"2025-06-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12410426/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Palliative medicine reports","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1089/pmr.2024.0099","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Introduction: Conducting studies in palliative care can be challenging. It has been highlighted that the interprofessional team may have their own reasons for not engaging in research projects. We aimed to identify barriers and facilitators to the involvement of palliative care team members in research projects.

Method: We used a cross-sectional online survey with qualitative and quantitative components to identify barriers and facilitators encountered by palliative care health professionals. Participants were physicians, nurses, nurse assistants, physiotherapists, dieticians, and occupational therapists working in the Division of Palliative Medicine of the Geneva University Hospitals in Switzerland. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and content analysis for the open-ended questions.

Results: A total of 107 questionnaires were sent, and 51 participants (48%) provided responses, of whom 75% expressed an interest in research, although only 47% had previously taken part in a research project. The most cited barriers were a lack of training on how to conduct studies, a lack of time, and a lack of funding. The main facilitators were the recognition that research enhances the quality of care and the belief that patients should be respected in their autonomy and given the opportunity to participate in research projects.

Conclusion: The interprofessional palliative care team would benefit from time, funds, and training in order to enhance a research culture within the team. The establishment of an interprofessional network to guide and share experiences would also be a good way to promote this culture.

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
从跨专业护理团队的角度进行姑息治疗研究:来自横断面调查的见解。
导言:开展姑息治疗研究可能具有挑战性。有人强调,跨专业团队可能有自己不参与研究项目的原因。我们的目的是确定姑息治疗团队成员参与研究项目的障碍和促进因素。方法:我们采用了一项具有定性和定量成分的横断面在线调查,以确定姑息治疗卫生专业人员遇到的障碍和促进因素。参与者是在瑞士日内瓦大学医院姑息医学部工作的医生、护士、护士助理、物理治疗师、营养师和职业治疗师。数据分析采用描述性统计和开放式问题的内容分析。结果:共发送了107份问卷,51名参与者(48%)提供了回复,其中75%的人表示对研究感兴趣,尽管只有47%的人之前参加过研究项目。被提到最多的障碍是缺乏关于如何进行研究的培训、缺乏时间和缺乏资金。主要的推动因素是认识到研究提高了护理质量,并相信应该尊重患者的自主权,并给予他们参与研究项目的机会。结论:跨专业姑息治疗团队可以从时间、资金和培训中获益,以增强团队内部的研究文化。建立一个跨专业的网络来指导和分享经验也是促进这种文化的好方法。
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
CiteScore
1.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
审稿时长
7 weeks
期刊最新文献
Death and Dying Attitude Through the Eyes of Nursing Students during Clinical Training: A Cross-Sectional Study in the United Arab Emirates. Depression and Coping Strategies Among Palliative Care Patients in a Tertiary Hospital in Karachi, Pakistan. Gender Differences in Patients with Advanced Heart Failure: A Secondary Data Analysis of the ENABLE CHF-PC Randomized Clinical Trial. Physician Perception of Trust and Communication with Asian Patients with Serious Illness and Their Families in the United States: An Exploratory Qualitative Study. Initiating and Documenting Goals of Care Discussion in Patients with Advanced Pancreatic and Colorectal Cancers: A Quality Improvement Project in a Low Resource Setting.
×
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