In the last decade, we have seen a growth of Compassionate Communities and Cities (CCC) at the end of life. There has been an evolution of organizations that help construct Community-Based Palliative Care programs. The objective is to analyze the implementation, methodology and effectiveness of the CCC models at the end of life. We conducted a systematic review following PRISMA ScR Guideline. The protocol was registered on PROSPERO (CRD42017068501). Five databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, Web of Science, CINAHL and Google Scholar) were searched for studies (from 2000 to 2018) using set eligibility criteria. Three reviewers screened full-texts articles and extracted study data. Outcomes were filled in a registration form which included a narrative synthesis of each article. We screened 1975 records. We retrieved 112 articles and included 31 articles for the final analysis: 17 descriptive studies, 4 interventions studies, 4 reviews and 6 qualitative studies. A total of 11 studies regard the development models of CCC at the end of life, 15 studies were about evaluation of compassionate communities’ programs and 5 studies were about protocols for the development of CCC programs. There is poor evidence of the implementation and evaluation models of CCC at the end of life. There is little and low-/very low-quality evidence about CCC development and assessment models. We found no data published on care intervention in advance disease and end of life. A global model for the development and evaluation of CCC at the end of life seems to be necessary.
The Spanish CES was found to be a reliable and valid measure of the satisfaction with end-of-life care structure and process from family members' perspectives.
Background: The most commonly used switching ratio from parenteral to oral methadone is 1:2. Methadone is highly bioavailable and a lower ratio might result in similar analgesia with less toxicity. Objective: To compare success and side effects with two ratios from parenteral to oral methadone: 1:2 versus 1:1.2 in hospitalized patients with cancer pain. Design: A multicenter double-blind randomized clinical trial. Settings/Particiants: Inpatients with well-controlled cancer pain with parenteral methadone requiring rotation to the oral route. Measurements: Outcomes included pain intensity (Brief Inventory Pain), opioid toxicity (Common Toxicology Criteria for Adverse Events), and methadone dose. Success was defined as no toxicity with good pain control at 72 hours. Results: Thirty-nine of forty-four randomized patients were evaluable: 21 in ratio 1:2 and 18 in ratio 1:1.2. Seventyone percent male. Median age 65 years. No significant differences in basal clinical characteristics between both groups. Median methadone dose pre/post switching was 24.5 mg-13.5 and 49 mg-27.3 for ratio 1:2, versus 23.3 mg-9.4 (p: not significant) and 28 mg-11.3 (p < 0.01) for ratio 1:1.2. Pain was well controlled without differences between both ratios. Drowsiness at day +1 (p < 0.017) and myoclonus at day +3 (p < 0.019) were more prevalent in group 1:2. Success was observed in 12 patients in ratio 1:2 versus 18 in ratio 1:1.2 (p < 0.001). Methadone side effects were observed in 12 patients in ratio 1:2 (mainly neurotoxicity symptoms) versus 2 in ratio 1:1.2 (p < 0.005). Conclusion: Ratio 1:1.2 when changing from parenteral to oral methadone resulted in lower toxicity and no difference in analgesia. More conservative dose adjustment during methadone route change should be considered. European Clinical Trials Register (EudraCT No. 2010-024092-39).
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.