Substantial variation was found concerning the quality of the study conduct and the transparency of reporting of Delphi studies used for the development of best practice guidance in palliative care. Since credibility of the resulting recommendations depends on the rigorous use of the Delphi technique, there is a need for consistency and quality both in the conduct and reporting of studies. To allow a critical appraisal of the methodology and the resulting guidance, a reporting standard for Conducting and REporting of DElphi Studies (CREDES) is proposed.
Background: Dementia is a life-limiting disease without curative treatments. Patients and families may need palliative care specific to dementia. Aim: To define optimal palliative care in dementia. Methods: Five-round Delphi study. Based on literature, a core group of 12 experts from 6 countries drafted a set of core domains with salient recommendations for each domain. We invited 89 experts from 27 countries to evaluate these in a two-round online survey with feedback. Consensus was determined according to predefined criteria. The fourth round involved decisions by the core team, and the fifth involved input from the European Association for Palliative Care. Results: A total of 64 (72%) experts from 23 countries evaluated a set of 11 domains and 57 recommendations. There was immediate and full consensus on the following eight domains, including the recommendations: person-centred care, communication and shared decision-making; optimal treatment of symptoms and providing comfort (these two identified as central to care and research); setting care goals and advance planning; continuity of care; psychosocial and spiritual support; family care and involvement; education of the health care team; and societal and ethical issues. After revision, full consensus was additionally reached for prognostication and timely recognition of dying. Recommendations on nutrition and dehydration (avoiding overly aggressive, burdensome or futile treatment) and on dementia stages in relation to care goals (applicability of palliative care) achieved moderate consensus. Conclusion:We have provided the first definition of palliative care in dementia based on evidence and consensus, a framework to provide guidance for clinical practice, policy and research.
For more than 30 years, the term "palliative care" has been used. From the outset, the term has undergone a series of transformations in its definitions and consequently in its tasks and goals. There remains a lack of consensus on a definition. The aim of this article is to analyse the definitions of palliative care in the specialist literature and to identify the key elements of palliative care using discourse analysis: a qualitative methodology. The literature search focused on definitions of the term 'palliative medicine' and 'palliative care' in the World Wide Web and medical reference books in English and German. A total of 37 English and 26 German definitions were identified and analysed. Our study confirmed the lack of a consistent meaning concerning the investigated terms, reflecting on-going discussion about the nature of the field among palliative care practitioners. Several common key elements were identified. Four main categories emerged from the discourse analysis of the definition of palliative care: target groups, structure, tasks and expertise. In addition, the theoretical principles and goals of palliative care were discussed and found to be key elements, with relief and prevention of suffering and improvement of quality of life as main goals. The identified key elements can contribute to the definition of the concept 'palliative care'. Our study confirms the importance of semantic and ethical influences on palliative care that should be considered in future research on semantics in different languages.
In a new team, close communication is particularly important for staff as they reorientate themselves to the dynamics of a new peer group. The results confirm the overwhelming importance of clarity, commitment and close, positive exchange among team members for successful team work.
BackgroundThe concept of complexity is used in palliative care (PC) to describe the nature of patients’ situations and the extent of resulting needs and care demands. However, the term or concept is not clearly defined and operationalised with respect to its particular application in PC. As a complex problem, a care situation in PC is characterized by reciprocal, nonlinear relations and uncertainties. Dealing with complex problems necessitates problem-solving methods tailored to specific situations. The theory of complex adaptive systems (CAS) provides a framework for locating problems and solutions.This study aims to describe criteria contributing to complexity of PC situations from the professionals’ view and to develop a conceptual framework to improve understanding of the concept of “complexity” and related elements of a PC situation by locating the complex problem “PC situation” in a CAS.MethodsQualitative interview study with 42 semi-structured expert (clinical/economical/political) interviews. Data was analysed using the framework method. The thematic framework was developed inductively. Categories were reviewed, subsumed and connected considering CAS theory.ResultsThe CAS of a PC situation consists of three subsystems: patient, social system, and team. Agents in the "system patient" are allocated to further subsystems on patient level: physical, psycho-spiritual, and socio-cultural. The "social system" and the "system team" are composed of social agents, who affect the CAS as carriers of characteristics, roles, and relationships. Environmental factors interact with the care situation from outside the system. Agents within subsystems and subsystems themselves interact on all hierarchical system levels and shape the system behaviour of a PC situation.ConclusionsThis paper provides a conceptual framework and comprehensive understanding of complexity in PC. The systemic view can help to understand and shape situations and dynamics of individual care situations; on higher hierarchical level, it can support an understanding and framework for the development of care structures and concepts. The framework provides a foundation for the development of a model to differentiate PC situations by complexity of patients and care needs. To enable an operationalisation and classification of complexity, relevant outcome measures mirroring the identified system elements should be identified and implemented in clinical practice.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (10.1186/s12913-019-3961-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.