Qualitative analysis examines healthcare professionals' attitudes on home-based treatment in hemato-oncology, indicating the need for robust support systems.
PURPOSE: This study aimed to examine the perceived challenges and attitudes toward home-based treatment for hematology and hemato-oncology patients among physicians and nurses. METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted based on 23 semistructured interviews with physicians (n = 11) and nurses (n = 12) from eight hospitals across Israel. The participants were recruited using opportunistic sampling, and the interviews were analyzed thematically using an inductive reflexive thematic analysis approach. Data saturation was achieved. RESULTS: Three overarching themes emerged: (1) the hospital as a safe haven: the conflict between hospital safety and the benefits of home treatment; participants emphasized the importance of hospital-based monitoring and expressed concerns about patient safety in home settings; (2) building a well-functioning home treatment system vs. fearing loss of control; while envisioning an organized, hospital-led model, participants stressed the need for trained staff, dedicated coordination, and clinical oversight; and (3) balancing costs, risks, and institutional support; participants highlighted financial disincentives, infrastructure gaps, and the role of professional trust in promoting patient acceptance. CONCLUSIONS: Although healthcare professionals recognize the potential benefits of home-based treatment, their support is contingent upon robust clinical protocols, institutional alignment, and clear coordination mechanisms. These findings underscore the central role of provider engagement in advancing safe and sustainable models of home care for hematology and hemato-oncology patients. The study offers practical insights that will assist in implementing health policies, developing clinical programs, and organizational planning for the safe and sustainable implementation of nonpalliative home care in hematology and hemato-oncology.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Eliyahu et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: