Exploring different stakeholder’s perspectives on ward rounds in paediatric oncology: A qualitative study

Research Square

Abstract

Abstract objectives The ward round is a core routine for interprofessional communication and clinical care planning. It allows health care professionals and patients to meet regularly and encourages patients to take an active role. Despite its high value for patient-centred care, there exists no universal definition of ward round. Little is known about the different attitudes and expectations of participants towards a ‘good’ ward round (WR). This study aims to capture the experiences and expectations of different stakeholders to better understand their ward round needs Method Semi-structured interviews were conducted with patients, parents, nurses and medical doctors of a paediatric oncology ward until theoretical saturation (13 interviews). A standardised qualitative analysis using the phenomenological framework defined by Colaizzi was used to identify important aspects in the interviews. Results Three major themes were identified in the interviews: (1) Structure and Organisation; (2) Communication; (3) Education. Further analysis revealed 23 categories and elucidated a number of opportunities and unmet needs stakeholders recognised within WR: The WR functions in comforting families in stressful situations, and relationship building. Interviewees expressed their concerns about missing structures. Families pleaded for smaller WR teams and more layperson language. Health care professionals underscored the lack of formal education on conducting ward rounds. Paediatric patients stated that WR scared them without proper explanation. All interviewees emphasized the need for professionalization of the WR. Conclusion This study gives important insights into practical WR functions and challenges in paediatric oncology. Although performed universally, WR are poorly explored or evaluated. This structured analysis synthesizes important expectations of different WR stakeholders, stressing the need for guidelines, training, and preparation. Ethics committee approval No. 7700, 05.03.2018 (Hannover Medical School).

Authors 6

1. Lea P. Berndt

   Medizinische Hochschule Hannover

   Affiliation as printed

   Hannover Medical School

2. Julia Sellin Aachen

   Universitätsklinikum Aachen · RWTH Aachen University

   Affiliation as printed

   University Hospital RWTH Aachen

3. Urs Mücke

   Medizinische Hochschule Hannover

   Affiliation as printed

   Hannover Medical School

4. Martin Mücke Aachen

   Universitätsklinikum Aachen · RWTH Aachen University

   Affiliation as printed

   University Hospital RWTH Aachen

5. Rupert Conrad

   University Hospital Münster

   Affiliation as printed

   University Hospital Muenster

6. Lorenz Grigull corresponding

   University Hospital Bonn

   Affiliation as printed

   University Hospital Bonn

   University Hospital Bonn Research