How clinical structures shape diagnostic practices in Swedish hard-to-heal ulcer care : a grounded theory study
(2025) In BMJ Open 15(10).- Abstract
Objective The aim of this study was to explore why patients with hard-to-heal ulcers are treated without an aetiological diagnosis, using a grounded theory approach. Design The study employed a qualitative semistructured interview design to gain in-depth insights. Data were collected in 2024, and an explanatory model was formed in accordance with grounded theory analysis. Setting Interviews were conducted with healthcare staff across primary, community and specialist care units in Sweden, encompassing both public and private sectors and representing a wide geographical spread. Participants The study involved 23 healthcare professionals, including nurses (n=18), assistant nurses (n=2) and physicians (n=3), from 22 healthcare units that... (More)
Objective The aim of this study was to explore why patients with hard-to-heal ulcers are treated without an aetiological diagnosis, using a grounded theory approach. Design The study employed a qualitative semistructured interview design to gain in-depth insights. Data were collected in 2024, and an explanatory model was formed in accordance with grounded theory analysis. Setting Interviews were conducted with healthcare staff across primary, community and specialist care units in Sweden, encompassing both public and private sectors and representing a wide geographical spread. Participants The study involved 23 healthcare professionals, including nurses (n=18), assistant nurses (n=2) and physicians (n=3), from 22 healthcare units that participated in a preceding national mapping study. Participants were selected purposively to represent various professional roles and healthcare levels. Results The analysis resulted in a theoretical model based on two categories: Healthcare traditions and clinical practices and Clinical governance. The lack of an aetiological diagnosis can be attributed to a traditional division of tasks, where ulcer care falls within the nurses’ domain. As a result, patients often receive treatment without a physician’s involvement, especially in home healthcare. Barriers and enablers for a diagnosis are present on different levels; issues close to the patient as well as structural matters. The results illustrate how healthcare units can be positioned along a scale, from traditional work distribution to evidence-based guidelines. Conclusions This study can be used to get a deeper understanding of the challenges of current wound management, where clinical governance can support or undermine the movement from a traditional work distribution towards an evidence-based clinical practice. Furthermore, this study can provide a basis for discussing quality improvement, to obtain good and equal care for patients with hard-to-heal ulcers.
(Less)
- author
- Roxenius, Jenny ; Wickstrom, Hanna Linnea LU ; Skär, Lisa and Oien, Rut Frank
- organization
- publishing date
- 2025-10
- type
- Contribution to journal
- publication status
- published
- subject
- keywords
- Chronic Disease, Clinical Decision-Making, Frail Elderly, Organisation of health services, WOUND MANAGEMENT
- in
- BMJ Open
- volume
- 15
- issue
- 10
- article number
- e106583
- publisher
- BMJ Publishing Group
- external identifiers
-
- scopus:105019822612
- pmid:41130698
- ISSN
- 2044-6055
- DOI
- 10.1136/bmjopen-2025-106583
- language
- English
- LU publication?
- yes
- id
- dfdf7c82-2337-4322-8b9c-a93df6ac4c92
- date added to LUP
- 2025-12-16 13:44:40
- date last changed
- 2025-12-17 03:00:13
@article{dfdf7c82-2337-4322-8b9c-a93df6ac4c92,
abstract = {{<p>Objective The aim of this study was to explore why patients with hard-to-heal ulcers are treated without an aetiological diagnosis, using a grounded theory approach. Design The study employed a qualitative semistructured interview design to gain in-depth insights. Data were collected in 2024, and an explanatory model was formed in accordance with grounded theory analysis. Setting Interviews were conducted with healthcare staff across primary, community and specialist care units in Sweden, encompassing both public and private sectors and representing a wide geographical spread. Participants The study involved 23 healthcare professionals, including nurses (n=18), assistant nurses (n=2) and physicians (n=3), from 22 healthcare units that participated in a preceding national mapping study. Participants were selected purposively to represent various professional roles and healthcare levels. Results The analysis resulted in a theoretical model based on two categories: Healthcare traditions and clinical practices and Clinical governance. The lack of an aetiological diagnosis can be attributed to a traditional division of tasks, where ulcer care falls within the nurses’ domain. As a result, patients often receive treatment without a physician’s involvement, especially in home healthcare. Barriers and enablers for a diagnosis are present on different levels; issues close to the patient as well as structural matters. The results illustrate how healthcare units can be positioned along a scale, from traditional work distribution to evidence-based guidelines. Conclusions This study can be used to get a deeper understanding of the challenges of current wound management, where clinical governance can support or undermine the movement from a traditional work distribution towards an evidence-based clinical practice. Furthermore, this study can provide a basis for discussing quality improvement, to obtain good and equal care for patients with hard-to-heal ulcers.</p>}},
author = {{Roxenius, Jenny and Wickstrom, Hanna Linnea and Skär, Lisa and Oien, Rut Frank}},
issn = {{2044-6055}},
keywords = {{Chronic Disease; Clinical Decision-Making; Frail Elderly; Organisation of health services; WOUND MANAGEMENT}},
language = {{eng}},
number = {{10}},
publisher = {{BMJ Publishing Group}},
series = {{BMJ Open}},
title = {{How clinical structures shape diagnostic practices in Swedish hard-to-heal ulcer care : a grounded theory study}},
url = {{http://dx.doi.org/10.1136/bmjopen-2025-106583}},
doi = {{10.1136/bmjopen-2025-106583}},
volume = {{15}},
year = {{2025}},
}