A randomised controlled trial was undertaken to assess the effectiveness of a hospital Palliative Care Team (PCT) on physical symptoms and health-related quality of life (HRQoL); patient, family carer and primary care professional reported satisfaction with care; and health service resource use. The full package of advice and support provided by a multidisciplinary specialist PCT ('full-PCT') was compared with limited telephone advice ('telephone-PCT', the control group) in the setting of a teaching hospital trust in the SW of England. The trial recruited 261 out of 684 new inpatient referrals; 175 were allocated to 'full-PCT', 86 to 'telephone-PCT' (2 : 1 randomisation); with 191 (73%) being assessed at 1 week. There were highly significant improvements in symptoms, HRQoL, mood and 'emotional bother' in 'full-PCT' at 1 week, maintained over the 4-week follow-up. A smaller effect was seen in 'telephone-PCT'; there were no significant differences between the groups. Satisfaction with care in both groups was high and there was no significant difference between them. These data reflect a high standard of care of patients dying of cancer and other chronic diseases in an acute hospital environment, but do not demonstrate a difference between the two models of service delivery of specialist palliative care.

No abstract

The current policy trend is to encourage greater choice in the use of welfare services. To make informed choices, people need information. The process of finding and using information has costs for individuals in terms of effort, time and material resources. These costs are different for different people and impact on their use of information in different ways. Thus, the accessibility of information is important in ensuring those people who need to make choices can do so in an informed way. This paper discusses the importance of information in making informed choices about social support by drawing on the findings of a scoping review of government research and development activity on the accessibility of information about adult social care services. The scoping review was carried out in spring 2006. Details of recent, current and planned projects were obtained through discussions with staff in government departments, government agencies and other related organisations identified using a snowballing technique. Forty-two contacts were made. Eleven research and 36 development projects were identified that aimed to investigate or improve the accessibility of information about social care services. A limited literature search was undertaken on information needs in areas not already under investigation by government. Eighteen articles were identified. Information and helpline staff from six voluntary organisations gave their views on the accessibility of information about social care services. Our findings show that there is no government-related or other recent research evidence on the specific information access needs for some user groups and services, for example, people from ethnic minority groups. For other user groups, such as people with chaotic lifestyles, there is evidence on information needs but no current or planned development projects to address these needs. The implications for the costs of finding and processing information to aid informed choices are discussed.

ImportantA fi st look s ie tifi su a is eated f o the o igi al autho -supplied summary once the normal NIHR Journals Library peer and editorial review processes are complete. The summary has undergone full peer and editorial review as documented at NIHR Journals Library website and may undergo rewrite during the publication process. The order of authors was correct at editorial sign-off stage.A final version (which has undergone a rigorous copy-edit and proofreading) will publish as part of a fuller account of the research in a forthcoming issue of the Health Services and Delivery Research journal.A ue ies a out this fi st look e sio of the s ie tifi su a should e add essed to the NIHR Journals Library Editorial Office -nihredit@soton.ac.uk. The authors have been wholly responsible for all data collection, analysis and interpretation, and for writing up their work. The HS&DR editors have tried to ensure the accuracy of the autho s o k a d ould like to tha k the e ie e s fo thei o st u ti e o e ts however; they do not accept liability for damages or losses arising from material published in this scientific summary.This fi st look s ie tifi su a p ese ts i depe de t esea h fu ded the Natio al Institute for Health Research (NIHR). The views and opinions expressed by authors in this publication are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HS&DR programme or the Department of Health. If there are verbatim quotations included in this publication the views and opinions expressed by the interviewees are those of the interviewees and do not necessarily reflect those of the authors, those of the NHS, the NIHR, NETSCC, the HS&DR programme or the Department of Health. Scientific summaryBackground Dementia is a growing health problem internationally. When cure is unlikely imminently, providing good quality and cost-effective care, over a long period of need, will remain a major challenge for health and other care providers. Improving quality of care in general hospitals, living well with dementia in care homes, reducing the use of anti-psychotic medication and improving health outcomes through improving care outcomes are priority policy objectives for dementia.

This paper explores how disabled adults and older people find and use information to help make choices about services. It presents findings from a qualitative longitudinal study in England. Thirty participants had support needs that fluctuated, meaning that additional services might be needed on a temporary basis; and 20 had the sudden onset of support needs resulting from an accident or rapid deterioration in health. Each disabled adult or older person was interviewed three times between 2007 and 2009, using a semi-structured topic guide. They were asked to discuss a recent choice about services, focussing, amongst other things, on their use of information. Interviews were transcribed and coded, then charted according to emergent themes. A wide range of choices and sources of information were discussed. These were dominated by health and to some extent by social care. Key findings are that information was valuable not just in weighing up different service options, but as a precondition for such choices, and that disabled adults and older people with the gradual onset of support needs and no prior knowledge about services can be disadvantaged by their lack of access to relevant information at this pre-choice stage. Timely access to information was also important, especially for people without the support of emergency or crisis management teams. Healthcare professionals were trusted sources of information but direct payment advisers appeared less so. Ensuring that practitioners are confident in their knowledge of direct payments, and have the communication skills to impart that knowledge, is essential. There may be a role also for specialist information advocates or expert lay-advisers in enabling disabled adults and older people to access and consider information about choices at relevant times.