Background:Where people die can influence a number of indicators of the quality of dying. We aimed to describe the place of death of people with cancer and its associations with clinical, socio-demographic and healthcare supply characteristics in 14 countries.Methods:Cross-sectional study using death certificate data for all deaths from cancer (ICD-10 codes C00-C97) in 2008 in Belgium, Canada, Czech Republic, England, France, Hungary, Italy, Mexico, the Netherlands, New Zealand, South Korea, Spain (2010), USA (2007) and Wales (N=1 355 910). Multivariable logistic regression analyses evaluated factors associated with home death within countries and differences across countries.Results:Between 12% (South Korea) and 57% (Mexico) of cancer deaths occurred at home; between 26% (Netherlands, New Zealand) and 87% (South Korea) occurred in hospital. The large between-country differences in home or hospital deaths were partly explained by differences in availability of hospital- and long-term care beds and general practitioners. Haematologic rather than solid cancer (odds ratios (ORs) 1.29–3.17) and being married rather than divorced (ORs 1.17–2.54) were most consistently associated with home death across countries.Conclusions:A large country variation in the place of death can partly be explained by countries' healthcare resources. Country-specific choices regarding the organisation of end-of-life cancer care likely explain an additional part. These findings indicate the further challenge to evaluate how different specific policies can influence place of death patterns.

The large differences between countries in and beyond Europe in the place of death of people in potential need of palliative care are not entirely attributable to sociodemographic characteristics, cause of death or availability of healthcare resources, which suggests that countries' palliative and end-of-life care policies may influence where people die.

These estimations of the size of the population potentially in need of palliative care provide robust indications of the challenge countries are facing if they want to seriously address palliative care needs at the population level.

No abstract

Objectives Prognostic awareness relates to patients' capacity to understand their prognosis and the likely illness trajectory. Based on the current evidence, accurate PA is associated with decrease in uncertainty, depresivity, and anxiety and with increase in quality of life. However, other studies found also negative associations of PA and quality of life and mental health. This systematic review synthesizes the available literature on factors associated with accurate prognostic awareness in patients with cancer. Methods Four databases were systematically searched for studies assessing prognostic awareness in patients with cancer. In these studies, we looked for factors positively or negatively associated with prognostic awareness. Included studies were critically appraised for methodological quality. Results We screened 28 078 studies and included 70. In these studies, 102 factors were found to be related to prognostic awareness positively or negatively. Identified factors were divided into seven groups: demographic factors, factors related to coping, health condition factors, psychological factors, factors associated with end‐of‐life care, factors related to communication, and factors related to relatives. Prognostic awareness differs according to age, personality, communication with doctor, disease stage, or being outpatient. For some factors such as depression, anxiety, or quality of life, higher level of these factors was found to be associated with accurate and inaccurate prognostic awareness. Conclusions Prognostic awareness is a complex phenomenon associated with various positive and negative associations for patients with cancer. Clinicians must consider individual preferences and values of patients and their families when discussing prognosis and must be prepared for potential adverse outcomes.