Search

Purpose: Comfort Measures Only (CMO) is a label commonly used in the USA that guides the care of a hospitalized patient who is likely to die. The CMO label has unclear and inconsistent meaning, calling to question the experiences and practices of hospital-basedalliative care providers. The purpose of this study was to understand the meaning of CMO as experienced by hospital-based palliative care providers., Methods: Using hermeneutic phenomenological research, we investigated eight palliative care experts' common experiences and shared practices of using CMO order sets in their hospital work settings. Data were collected through individual face-to-face interviews, and were analysed by an interpretive team., Results: Four related themes and one constitutive pattern of "Dealing with Dying" reflect the meaning of comfort-measures-only practices. The themes are: comfort care as morphine drip; enacting a traditional binary pattern of care: all or nothing; supporting patient and family at end of life vs. CMO; and evolving culture-a better way to care for the dying., Conclusion: Palliative care providers and non-palliative clinicians understood and practiced end of life care in sharply different ways with dying in hospital settings, raising new questions that analyse, modify and extend extant knowledge.

One thousand people die every day in India as a result of TB, a preventable and treatable disease, even though the Constitution of India, government schemes, and international law guarantee available, accessible, acceptable, quality health care. Failure to address the spread of TB and to provide quality treatment to all affected populations constitutes a public health and human rights emergency that demands action and accountability. As part of a broader strategy, health activists in India employ Public Interest Litigation (PIL) to hold the state accountable for rights violations and to demand new legislation, standards for patient care, accountability for under-spending, improvements in services at individual facilities, and access to government entitlements in marginalized communities. Taking inspiration from right to health PIL cases (PILs), lawyers in a New Delhi-based rights organization used desk research, fact-findings, and the Right To Information Act to build a TB PIL for the Delhi High Court, Sanjai Sharma v. NCT of Delhi and Others (2015). The case argues that inadequate implementation of government TB schemes violates the Constitutional rights to life, health, food, and equality. Although PILs face substantial challenges, this paper concludes that litigation can be a crucial advocacy and accountability tool for people living with TB and their allies., Competing Interests: Conflicts of Interest: None declared.