Blood transfusion in haematology: A qualitative exploration of patients' and healthcare professionals' perceptions.

OBJECTIVES: Repeated blood transfusions are indicated for the management of patients with cancer or blood disorders. Patients' perceptions about transfusions may be associated with decision-making and coping, which has been under-explored in the haematology context. This study therefore aimed to explore haematology transfusion patients' and HCPs' perceptions of blood transfusion, drawing on theory and previously identified themes of transfusion perceptions. DESIGN: Semi-structured interview study with 14 adult blood transfusion patients and 14 HCPs (consultants, registrars, nurses) at two UK haematology units. METHODS: Patient- and HCP-tailored topic guides were developed based on themes of blood transfusion perceptions identified in a systematic review: 'Health benefits', 'Safety/risk', 'Negative emotions', 'Alternatives' 'Decision making' and 'Necessity'. Transcripts were analysed using deductive and thematic analysis. Patient and HCP themes were compared using triangulation methods. Conceptual models (one for patients, one for HCPs) specific to haematology portraying the association between themes were developed. RESULTS: Findings for patients and HCPs converged with transfusion reported as beneficial for patients, who were largely involved in the decision-making. Both groups also reported concerns about transfusion, including iron-overload, allergic reactions and challenges to deliver transfusions in time-pressurized services. Themes in the conceptual models included patient 'Burden' of receiving repeated transfusions and 'Supportive relationships', reflective of patients' positive interactions with other patients and HCPs in the haematology unit. CONCLUSION: Despite the challenges for patients receiving repeated transfusions, convergent perceptions suggest a shared understanding of patients' transfusion experiences. Identified challenges could inform ways to improve transfusion services and patients' experiences.

Patient perspectives of recovery after hip fracture: a systematic review and qualitative synthesis.

PURPOSE: The purpose of the current review is to synthesize the evidence of patients' perspectives of recovery after hip fracture across the care continuum. METHODS: A systematic search was conducted, focusing on qualitative data from hip fracture patients. Screening, quality appraisal, and a subset of articles for extraction were completed in duplicate. Themes were generated using a thematic synthesis of data from original studies. RESULTS: Fourteen high-quality qualitative studies were included. Four review themes were identified: recovery as participation, feelings of vulnerability, driving recovery, and reliance on support. Patients considered recovery as a return to pre-fracture activities or "normal" enabling independence. Feelings of vulnerability were observed irrespective of the time since hip fracture and only diminished when recovery of function and activities enabled participation in valued activities, e.g., outdoor mobility. Participants expressed a desire to engage in recovery with realistic expectations and the benefits of meaningful feedback reported. While reliance on healthcare professionals decreased towards a later stage of recovery, reliance on social support persisted until recovery was perceived to have been achieved. CONCLUSION: Patient perspectives highlighted hip fracture as a major life event requiring health professional and social support to overcome feelings of vulnerability and enable active engagement in recovery.IMPLICATIONS FOR REHABILITATIONRehabilitation professionals should ensure expectations and goals are set early in the recovery process.Rehabilitation professionals should ensure goals set with patients are tailored to the individual's pre-fracture activities or "normal" promoting independence.Rehabilitation professionals should monitor goals ensuring they are providing support, motivation, and managing expectations across the care continuum.Rehabilitation professionals should address patients' feelings of vulnerability, particularly in the absence of social support, and ensure appropriate ongoing input to maximize recovery.

Orthopaedic physiotherapists' perceptions of mechanisms for observed variation in the implementation of physiotherapy practices in the early postoperative phase after hip fracture: a UK qualitative study.

OBJECTIVE: to explore physiotherapists' perceptions of mechanisms to explain observed variation in early postoperative practice after hip fracture surgery demonstrated in a national audit. METHODS: a qualitative semi-structured interview study of 21 physiotherapists working on orthopaedic wards at seven hospitals with different durations of physiotherapy during a recent audit. Thematic analysis of interviews drawing on Normalisation Process Theory to aid interpretation of findings. RESULTS: four themes were identified: achieving protocolised and personalised care; patient and carer engagement; multidisciplinary team engagement across the care continuum and strategies for service improvement. Most expressed variation from protocol was legitimate when driven by what is deemed clinically appropriate for a given patient. This tailored approach was deemed essential to optimise patient and carer engagement. Participants reported inconsistent degrees of engagement from the multidisciplinary team attributing this to competing workload priorities, interpreting 'postoperative physiotherapy' as a single professional activity rather than a care delivery approach, plus lack of integration between hospital and community care. All participants recognised changes needed at both structural and process levels to improve their services. CONCLUSION: physiotherapists highlighted an inherent conflict between their intention to deliver protocolised care and allowing for an individual patient-tailored approach. This conflict has implications for how audit results should be interpreted, how future clinical guidelines are written and how physiotherapists are trained. Physiotherapists also described additional factors explaining variation in practice, which may be addressed through increased engagement of the multidisciplinary team and resources for additional staffing and advanced clinical roles.