Search

Background: Despite a fast-paced environment, the emergency clinician has a duty to meet the palliative patient's needs. Despite suggested models and interventions, this remains challenging in practice. Aim: To raise awareness of these challenges by exploring the experience of palliative care patients and their families and informal carers attending the emergency department, and of the clinicians caring for them. Design: Qualitative systematic literature review and thematic synthesis. Search terms related to the population (palliative care patients, family carers, clinicians), exposure (the emergency department) and outcome (experience). The search was international but restricted to English and used a qualitative filter. Title, abstracts and, where retrieved, full texts were reviewed independently by two reviewers against predefined inclusion criteria arbitrated by a third reviewer. Studies were appraised for quality but not excluded on that basis. Data sources: MEDLINE [1946-], Embase[1947-], CINAHL [1981-] and PsycINFO [1987-] with a bibliography search. Results: 19 papers of 16 studies were included from Australia (n = 5), the United Kingdom (n = 5), and United States (n = 9) representing 482 clinical staff involved in the emergency department (doctors, nurses, paramedics, social workers, technicians), 61 patients and 36 carers. Nine descriptive themes formed three analytic themes: 'Environment and Purpose', 'Systems of Care and Interdisciplinary Working' and 'Education and Training'. Conclusion: In the included studies, provision of emergency palliative care is a necessary purpose of the emergency department. Failure to recognise this, gain the necessary skills or change to systems better suited to its delivery perpetuates poor implementation of palliative care in this environment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: Health care organizations need to be responsive to the needs of increasingly diverse patient populations. We compared the contents of six publicly available approaches to organizational responsiveness to diversity. The central questions addressed in this paper are: what are the most consistently recommended issues for health care organizations to address in order to be responsive to the needs of diverse groups that differ from the majority population? How much consensus is there between various approaches?Methods: We purposively sampled six approaches from the US, Australia and Europe and used qualitative textual analysis to categorize the content of each approach into domains (conceptually distinct topic areas) and, within each domain, into dimensions (operationalizations). The resulting classification framework was used for comparative analysis of the content of the six approaches.Results: We identified seven domains that were represented in most or all approaches: organizational commitment, empirical evidence on inequalities and needs, a competent and diverse workforce, ensuring access for all users, ensuring responsiveness in care provision, fostering patient and community participation, and actively promoting responsiveness. Variations in the operationalization of these domains related to different scopes, contexts and types of diversity. For example, approaches that focus on ethnic diversity mostly provide recommendations to handle cultural and language differences; approaches that take an intersectional approach and broaden their target population to vulnerable groups in a more general sense also pay attention to factors such as socio-economic status and gender.Conclusions: Despite differences in labeling, there is a broad consensus about what health care organizations need to do in order to be responsive to patient diversity. This opens the way to full scale implementation of organizational responsiveness in healthcare and structured evaluation of its effectiveness in improving patient outcomes. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]