Many families wished to be present at the moment of the patient's death; however, meaningful communication (saying "goodbye") between the patient and family members, and not their presence or absence itself, was associated with better outcomes on measures of depression or complicated grief. Health care professionals could consider promoting both mutual communication (relating to preparation for death) between family members and patients before imminent death, as well as the family's presence at the moment of death.

Background. End-of-life discussions (EOLds) occur infrequently until cancer patients become terminally ill. Methods. To identify factors associated with the timing of EOLds, we conducted a nationwide survey of 864 medical oncologists. We surveyed the timing of EOLds held with advanced cancer patients regarding prognosis, hospice, site of death, and do-not-resuscitate (DNR) status; and we surveyed physicians' experience of EOLds, perceptions of a good death, and beliefs regarding these issues. Multivariate analyses identified determinants of early discussions. Results. Among 490 physicians (response rate: 57%), 165 (34%), 65 (14%), 47 (9.8%), and 20 (4.2%) would discuss prognosis, hospice, site of death, and DNR status, respectively, "now" (i.e., at diagnosis) with a hypothetical patient with newly diagnosed metastatic cancer. In multivariate analyses, determinants of discussing prognosis "now" included the physician perceiving greater importance of autonomy in experiencing a good death (odds ratio [OR]: 1.34; p 5 .014),

Dying at a favorite place is one of the important determinants for terminally ill cancer patients. The primary aim was to clarify (1) differences in preferred place of care and place of death among the general public across four areas across Japan and (2) preferred place of care and place of death among community-representative cancer patients. A cross-sectional mail survey was conducted on 8,000 randomly selected general population. We examined preferred place of care and place of death using two vignettes and obtained a total of 3,984 (50%) responses. For the pain scenario, approximately 50% of the general public throughout four areas chose home as their preferred place of care; and for the dependent-without-pain scenario, about 40% chose home as preferred place of care. In cancer patients, for both scenarios, approximately 40% chose home as the preferred place of care, and they were significantly less likely to choose home. The most preferred combination of place of care and place of death was home hospice for both groups. Although there were statistically significant differences in preferred place of care and place of death among the four regions, the absolute difference was less than 8%. Independent determinants of choosing home as place of care included concern about family burden and being unable to adequately respond to sudden changes out of working hours. In conclusion, establishing more accessible home and hospice service is strongly required through arranging regional resources to reduce family burden, alleviating patient-perceived burdens, and improving 24-h support at home.

Patients, especially in action-hospitalization and surgery, can be expected to tell their children about their illness although they find negative aspects much more compelling than positive aspects and experience great distress. These patients have special needs for support from others.

No abstract

Background: Although confidence in providing palliative care services is an essential component of providing such care, factors relating to this have not been investigated in Japan. Objective: This study aimed to explore confidence in the ability to provide palliative care and associated difficulties and to explore correlations between these variables. Design: A cross-sectional mail survey of medical doctors and registered nurses in Japan was performed as part of a regional intervention trial: the Outreach Palliative Care Trial of Integrated Regional Model study. Subjects: Questionnaires were sent to 7905 medical professionals, and 409 hospital doctors, 235 general practitioners, 2160 hospital nurses and 115 home visiting nurses completed them. Results: Confidence in providing palliative care was low and difficulties frequent for all types of medical professionals assessed. In particular, only 8 -24% of them, depending on category, agreed to 'having adequate knowledge and skills regarding cancer pain management'. In particular, 55 -80% of medical professionals acknowledged difficulty with 'alleviation of cancer pain'. Multiple regression analysis revealed that confidence was positively correlated with the amount of relevant experience and, for medical doctors, with 'prescriptions of opioids (per year)'. Moreover, difficulties were negatively correlated with the amount of relevant clinical experience. Conclusions: Effective strategies for developing regional palliative care programs include basic education of medical professionals on management of cancer-related pain (especially regarding opioids) and other symptoms.

Objective: End-of-life discussions with patients can be one of the most difficult and stressful tasks for the oncologist. However, little is known about the discussions that healthcare providers have with patients in such situations and the difficulties they face. The primary end points of this study were to describe the contents of end-of-life discussion in the pediatric setting and the barriers to end-of-life discussion for pediatric patients, as perceived by pediatric healthcare providers. Methods: Participants were 10 healthcare providers. Semi-structured interviews were conducted, and the KJ method was performed to analyze the data. Results: We found 23 barriers against end-of-life discussion with pediatric cancer patients. These barriers were classified as follows: healthcare provider factors, patient factors, parent factors and institutional or cultural factors. In addition to barriers found in previous studies, some unique barriers were uncovered such as, 'Lack of confidence to face the patient after the discussion', 'Uncertain responsibility for treatment decision-making' and 'No compelling reason to discuss'. Healthcare providers actively discussed the purpose of treatment and the patients' wishes and concerns; however, they were reluctant to deal with the patients' own impending death and their estimated prognosis. Conclusions: End-of-life discussion with pediatric patients differs from that with adult patients.Further studies are required to analyze pediatric cases associated with end-of-life discussion and carefully discuss its adequacy, pros and cons.

Comprehensive quality indicators for palliative care programs were identified. The indicators are currently being used, and the feasibility of measuring change over time will be examined. It is expected that the indicators will be used effectively in the future. It is important to evaluate outcomes of the program, to improve weaknesses, improve outcomes, and promote the welfare of cancer patients.