Cited by 93Palliative Care and End-of-Life IssuesHealth Policy Implementation SciencePalliative and Oncologic Care

Barriers and facilitators to the implementation of a paediatric palliative care team

Open access
Verberne, Lisa M., Kars, Marijke C., Schepers, Sasja A., Schouten-van Meeteren, Antoinette Y. N., Grootenhuis, Martha A., van Delden, Johannes J. M.·2018·BMC Palliative Care

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Over the last decade, paediatric palliative care teams (PPCTs) have been introduced to support children with life-limiting diseases and their families and to ensure continuity, coordination and quality of paediatric palliative care (PPC). However, implementing a PPCT into an organisation is a challenge. The objective of this study was to identify barriers and facilitators reported by healthcare professionals (HCPs) in primary, secondary or tertiary care for implementing a newly initiated multidisciplinary PPCT to bridge the gap between hospital and home. METHODS: The Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations (MIDI) was used to assess responses of 71 HCPs providing PPC to one or more of the 129 children included in a pilot study of a PPCT based at a university children's hospital. The MIDI (29 items) assessed barriers and facilitators to implementing the PPCT by using a 5-point scale (completely disagree to completely agree) and additional open-ended questions. Items to which ≥20% of participants responded with 'totally disagree/disagree' and ≥80% responded with 'agree/totally agree' were considered as barriers and facilitators, respectively. A general inductive approach was used for open-ended questions. RESULTS: Reported barriers to implementing a PPCT were related to the HCP's own organisation (e.g., no working arrangements related to use of the intervention [PPCT] registered, other organisational changes such as merger going on). Reported facilitators were mainly related to the intervention (correctness, simplicity, observability and relevancy) and the user scale (positive outcome expectations, patient satisfaction) and only once to the organisation scale (information accessibility). Additionally, HCPs expressed the need for clarity about tasks of the PPCT and reported having made a transition from feeling threatened by the PPCT to satisfaction about the PPCT. CONCLUSION: Positive experiences with the PPCT are a major facilitator for implementing a PPCT. Tailored organisational strategies such as working arrangements by management, concrete information about the PPCT itself and the type of support provided by the PPCT should be clearly communicated to involved HCPs to increase awareness about benefits of the PPCT and ensure a successful implementation. New PPCTs need protection and resources in their initial year to develop into experienced and qualified PPCTs.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/s12904-018-0274-8

Cites

43 of 43 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • The barrier questionnaire used is based on the Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations (MIDI), a Dutch validated questionnaire developed by Fleuren et al. and used in several Dutch studies.

    “The used questionnaire was based on the Measurement Instrument for Determinants of Innovations (MIDI), a Dutch validated questionnaire developed by Fleuren et al. [31] and used in several Dutch studies [37,38].”

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

4 of the 47 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Verberne, L. M., Kars, M. C., Schepers, S. A., Schouten-van Meeteren, A. Y. N., Grootenhuis, M. A., & van Delden, J. J. M.
Affiliations
  • University Medical Center Utrecht (NL)
  • St. Jude Children's Research Hospital (US)
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
Corresponding author
Verberne, Lisa M.
Venue
BMC Palliative Care
Published
2018-02-12
Volume
17
Issue
1
Pages
23-23
ISSN
1472-684X (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2794786943
Cited by
92
References
47
Citations by year
2026: 12 · 2025: 13 · 2024: 9 · 2023: 12 · 2022: 15 · 2021: 10 · 2020: 9 · 2019: 9 · 2018: 3
FWCI
7.33
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
cc-by
Locations
  • BMC Palliative Care (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion, other-oa)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion)
  • Utrecht University Repository (Utrecht University) (submittedVersion, other-oa)
Funders
PAL Foundation
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › General Health Professions › Health Policy Implementation Science
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Palliative and Oncologic Care
Keywords
pediatric palliative care, palliative care team, implementation barriers, implementation facilitators, healthcare workers, multidisciplinary care, organizational change, clinician attitudes
MeSH terms
Adolescent, Child, Child, Preschool, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Health Resources, Hospitals, University, Humans, Infant, Male, Netherlands, Palliative Care, Pediatrics, Pilot Projects, Program Development

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review