| Autor: |
James C; University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas, USA.; Arkansas Children's Northwest Hospital, Springdale, Arkansas, USA., Sarvode Mothi S; St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA., Miller EG; Sidney Kimmel Medical College, Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, USA.; Nemours Children's Hospital, Wilmington, Delaware, USA., Kaye EC; St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Memphis, Tennessee, USA., Morvant A; Stanford School of Medicine and Stanford Medicine Children's Health, Palo Alto, California, USA., Stafford C; Louisiana State University Health Science Center-Baton Rouge, Baton Rouge, Louisiana, USA., Autrey AK; Children's Hospital New Orleans, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.; Louisiana State University Health Sciences Center-New Orleans, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA.; Tulane University School of Medicine, New Orleans, Louisiana, USA. |
| Abstrakt: |
Context: As pediatric palliative care (PPC) expands within institutions and nationally, little guidance is available on building outpatient programs. Objectives: We asked outpatient PPC (OPPC) program leaders in the United States about clinic development experiences to gather advice for growing programs. Methods: As part of a larger OPPC study, 48 freestanding children's hospitals with inpatient PPC programs were invited to complete a survey on OPPC. Self-selected participants were sent a follow-up survey soliciting free-text responses about development experiences. Quantitative data were analyzed with descriptive statistics. Qualitative data underwent inductive content analysis. Results: Thirty-six hospitals completed the initial survey, and 28 (78%) reported practicing clinic-based OPPC. Twenty-two of 28 completed program development questions. More than half (12/22, 55%) recommended a minimum total billable full-time equivalent (FTE) ≥3 before expanding into the outpatient setting. About two-thirds (14/22, 64%) suggested a minimum billable FTE ≥4 for 24/7 coverage. Half (50%) reported that their program grew from subspecialty clinics, most frequently hematology-oncology (10/11, 91%). Half (50%) placed initial limits on referrals, with many restricting schedule availability (7/11, 64%). Six of 12 participants (50%) willing to share more about their development experience completed a follow-up survey, from which three themes emerged: program logistics, expectations and boundaries, and establishing role and workflow. Participants focused advice on slow programmatic growth to optimize sustainability. Conclusion: Program leaders offer tangible guidance informed by their OPPC development experience. Future work is needed to leverage this advice within institutions to promote resilient and sustainable PPC growth. |
