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]

Introduction Research in palliative care (PC) is often regarded as challenging due to the vulnerability of the population and other peculiarities. We aim to systematically identify barriers to research in PC in the literature. Methods The electronic databases CINAHL, MEDLINE were searched for papers published in the last 25 years. Citations and then abstracts were screened for inclusion. Original papers were included on first-level analysis. On a second level reviews, reports, and position papers were analyzed. Papers containing a direct patient report were specifically analyzed. Barriers were categorized (ethical considerations, financial and time expenses, study design and methodology, human resources and politics) and results quantified. Results Twenty-one original papers and 65 other papers were included. Five studies involved patients directly, five were systematic reviews, three were study experiences, and seven were surveys or workshop reports. Most papers originated from UK, USA, or Norwegian Universities. Ethics and methods were the most often mentioned categories on both levels. Accrual, attrition, and gatekeeping were frequently named barriers. Complex invasive studies or possible side effects hinder patients' participation, as patients are often willing to participate for altruistic motivations. Discussion Barriers to PC research are ethical concerns and methodological challenges. Possible strategies to overcome methodological barriers include international collaborative efforts to include more patients and improve study designs. Ethical barriers indicate the need for patient involvement in the research development process and tailoring research specifically to the PC population. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]