Author:
Seibel Katharina,Rios Claudia Lorena Orellana,Sparna Titus,Becker Carola,Gaertner Jan,Becker Gerhild,Boehlke Christopher
Abstract
Abstract
Background
Digital health technologies such as sensor systems are intended to support healthcare staff in providing adequate patient care. In the Department of Palliative Medicine (University Medical Center Freiburg), we developed and implemented a noninvasive, bed-based sensor system in a pilot study. The aim was to detect distress in patients who were no longer able to express themselves by monitoring heart and respiratory rates, vocalizations, and movement measurements. The sensor system was intended to supplement standard care, which generally cannot guarantee constant monitoring. As there is a lack of data on how healthcare professionals experience such a techno-digital innovation, the aim of this study was to explore how the multiprofessional palliative care team who piloted the sensor system perceived its potential benefits and limitations, and how they experienced the broader context of healthcare technology and research in palliative care.
Methods
We conducted a qualitative interview study with 20 members of the palliative care team and analyzed the recorded, verbatim transcribed interviews using qualitative content analysis.
Results
The sensor system was described as easy to use and as helpful support for patients, care staff, and relatives, especially against the backdrop of demographic change. However, it could not replace human interpretation of stress and subsequent treatment decisions: this remained the expertise of the nursing staff. A potential reduction in personnel was expected to be a risk of a digital monitoring system. The special conditions of research and digital health technologies in an end-of-life context also became clear. Specifically, healthcare staff were open to health technologies if they benefited the patient and were compatible with professional nursing and/or palliative care attitudes. Additionally, a patient-protective attitude and possible interprofessional differences in priorities and the resulting challenges for the team became apparent.
Conclusions
A potential digital solution for distress monitoring was considered useful by palliative care practitioners. However, interprofessional differences and compatibility with existing palliative care practices need to be considered before implementing such a system. To increase user acceptability, the perspectives of healthcare professionals should be included in the implementation of technological innovations in palliative care.
Funder
Universitätsklinikum Freiburg
Publisher
Springer Science and Business Media LLC
Reference57 articles.
1. Bone AE, Gomes B, Etkind SN, Verne J, Murtagh FEM, Evans CJ, et al. What is the impact of population ageing on the future provision of end-of-life care? Population-based projections of place of death. Palliat Med. 2018;32(2):329–36.
2. Etkind SN, Bone AE, Gomes B, Lovell N, Evans CJ, Higginson IJ, et al. How many people will need palliative care in 2040? Past trends, future projections and implications for services. BMC Med. 2017;15(1):102.
3. Finucane AM, Bone AE, Etkind S, Carr D, Meade R, Munoz-Arroyo R, et al. How many people will need palliative care in Scotland by 2040? A mixed-method study of projected palliative care need and recommendations for service delivery. BMJ Open. 2021;11(2):e041317.
4. Lupu D, Quigley L, Mehfoud N, Salsberg ES. The growing demand for Hospice and Palliative Medicine Physicians: will the Supply keep up? J Pain Symptom Manage. 2018;55(4):1216–23.
5. Ronquillo Y, Meyers A, Korvek SJ. Digital Health. In: StatPearls [Internet]. Treasure Island (FL): StatPearls Publishing; 2024 [cited 2024 Jun 7]. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK470260/