Background Understanding the perceptions regarding what constitutes a "good death" among cancer patients and their families could help healthcare teams to ensure proper palliative and supportive care. Objectives To demonstrate and compare the wishes cancer patients and the perceptions of their relatives regarding end-of-life care, and to identify factors associated with patients' preferences regarding place of death. Methods A sample of cancer patients and their relatives who attended the Srinagarind Hospital (Thailand) oncology clinic or day chemotherapy from September 2017 to August 2018 were enrolled. Questionnaires were given to the participants, in which the patients were asked to respond based on their own end-of-life preferences, and relatives were asked to imagine how the patients would respond to the questions. Results One hundred eighty pairs of patients and relatives were recruited. Respondents in both groups placed importance on place of death, relationship with family, physical and psychological comfort, and relationship with the medical staff. Both groups generally agreed with the statements on the questionnaire (10/13 statements). Relatives underestimated the preferences of the patients in 3 areas: “not being a burden to others,” “preparation for death,” and “physical and psychological comfort.” Being married (adjusted odds ratio (AOD) 6.4, 95%confidence interval (CI) 1.1,36.5), having had more than 6 years of education (AOD 6.5, 95%CI 1.8,23.7), having lung cancer compared to colon cancer (AOD 12, 95%CI 1.2,118.7), duration after cancer diagnosis (AOD 0.9, 95%CI 0.93,0.99), previous hospital admission (AOD 5.7, 95%CI 1.5,21.2), and life satisfaction (AOD 17.6, 95%CI 2.9,104.9) were factors associated with preference for home death. Conclusion Thai cancer patients and their relatives indicated similar preferences with regard to what constitutes a good death and patients' wishes for their end-of-life period. However, the patients' relatives underestimated the importance patients placed on statements in three domains. Factors that influenced a preference for a home death were identified.

Deficiencies in pain care within the developing world are starting to be realized. Children, in particular, are vulnerable, as preliminary studies suggest that these children receive less pain treatment because of health professionals' attitudes and beliefs. This article reports on some of the findings of the first study in a larger program of research aimed at improving pediatric pain care in Thailand. Improvements in practice are not simply the result of providing evidenced-based knowledge, but a complex process that includes the context of care. Given that little is known about the pain management experiences of Thai health professionals, including the challenges they face, we used focus groups to capture their stories. Data revealed a need for both updating pain knowledge and for supporting an increased use of appropriate practices. In this article, we focus on the issues concerning the assessment of pain resulting from underrecognizing children's pain and complex issues in communicating findings of children's pain.

No abstract

BackgroundCancer not only impairs a patient’s physical and psychosocial functional behaviour, but also contributes to negative impact on family members’ health related quality of life. Currently, there is an absence of a relevant tool in Thai with which to measure such impact. The aim of this study was to translate and validate the Family Reported Outcome Measure (FROM-16) in Thai cancer patients’ family members.MethodsThai version of FROM-16 was generated by interactive forward-backward translation process following standard guidelines. This was tested for psychometric properties including reliability and validity, namely content validity, concurrent validity, known group validity, internal consistency, exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis. Construct validity was examined by comparing the Thai FROM-16 version with the WHOQOL-BREF-THAI.ResultsThe internal consistency reliability was strong (Cronbach’s alpha = 0.86). A Negative moderate correlation between the Thai FROM-16 and WHOQOL-BREF-THAI was observed (r = − 0.4545, p < 0.00), and known group validity was proved by a statistically significant higher score in family members with high burden of care and insufficient income. The factor analysis supported both 3-factor and 2-factor loading model with slight difference when compared with the original version.ConclusionsThe Thai FROM-16 showed good reliability and validity in Thai family members of patients with cancer. A slight difference in factor analysis results compared to the original version could be due to cross-culture application.

No abstract