A pan-European survey of research in end-of-life cancer care

Abstract

BackgroundTo date, there is no coordinated strategy for end-of-life (EOL) cancer care research in Europe. The PRISMA (Reflecting the Positive Diversities of European Priorities for Research and Measurement in End-of-life Care) project is aiming to develop a programme integrating research and measurement in EOL care. This survey aimed to map and describe present EOL cancer care research in Europe and to identify priorities and barriers.Material and methodsA questionnaire of 62 questions was developed and 201 researchers in 41 European countries were invited to complete it online in May 2009. An open invitation to participate was posted on the internet.ResultsInvited contacts in 36 countries sent 127 replies; eight additional responses came through websites. A total of 127 responses were eligible for analysis. Respondents were 69 male and 58 female, mean age 49 (28–74) years; 85% of the scientific team leaders were physicians. Seventy-one of 127 research groups were located in a teaching hospital or cancer centre. Forty-five percent of the groups had only one to five members and 28% six to ten members. Sixty-three of 92 groups reported specific funding for EOL care research. Seventy-five percent of the groups had published papers in journals with impact factor ≤5 in the last 3 years; 8% had published in journals with impact factor >10. Forty-four out of 90 groups reported at least one completed Ph.D. in the last 3 years. The most frequently reported active research areas were pain, assessment and measurement tools, and last days of life and quality of death. Very similar areas—last days of life and quality of death, pain, fatigue and cachexia, and assessment and measurement tools—were ranked as the most important research priorities. The most important research barriers were lack of funding, lack of time, and insufficient knowledge/expertise.ConclusionsMost research groups in EOL care are small. The few large groups (14%) had almost half of the reported publications, and more than half of the current Ph.D. students. There is a lack of a common strategy and coordination in EOL cancer care research and a great need for international collaboration.Electronic supplementary materialThe online version of this article (doi:10.1007/s00520-010-1048-x) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Cancer-Related Therapies at the End of Life in Hospitalized Cancer Patients from Four Swiss Cantons: SAKK 89/09

“…Research on end-of-life cancer care, especially in Europe, has only emerged during the last two decades and still receives only minimal financial support [25]. The importance of such research is evident, as disparities between countries, within countries and among different patient populations do matter on many levels such as quality of care issues [26,27,28,29,30,31], economical aspects [32,33,34] or shifts in the delivery of care over time [35].…”

Can palliative care reduce futile treatment? A systematic review

“…This reflects wider research priorities 55. By restricting length of time over which differences between control and intervention are allowed to develop, any benefit inherent in the palliative approach may not be fully realised by patients in trials, hence not reported.…”

Mind the gap: a step forward in supporting hospice-based research

“…Although well honed in the craft of clinical governance, independent hospices may baulk at the notion of research governance, robbed as they are of NHS Research and Development (R&D) insight and support. We have surveyed independent palliative care settings in Wales and found enthusiasm for undertaking research dampened by lack of knowledge, lack of resources and concerns about financial and clinical impact—resonating with international findings elsewhere 5 9. We therefore proposed the development of guidance in the form of a research governance toolkit for independent hospices, a concept that was universally endorsed in our survey.…”