Search

Background: the right for patients of all diagnoses to be in receipt of palliative care from an early point in the diagnosis of a life-limiting condition is now enshrined in policy in a number of countries and increased emphasis is placed upon the role of generalist palliative care. However, little is known as to how this policy is enacted on the ground.Aim: to explore understandings of, and perceived roles in relation to, palliative care provision amongst generalist and specialist health care providers in England and New Zealand.Design: qualitative data were collected via individual interviews and focus groups.Setting/participants: participants comprised generalist and specialist palliative care providers working in a variety of settings in England (n = 58) and New Zealand (n = 80).Results: the following issues with significant implications for this new phase of development for palliative care were identified: (1) difficulties with terminology and perceived roles/responsibilities; (2) problems of integrating palliative care into a generalist workload; (3) challenges in generalist/specialist partnership working; and (4) the potential negative consequences of specialization.Conclusions: these data indicate that, within England and New Zealand, the policy rhetoric of universal palliative care provision is not being straightforwardly translated into service delivery and individual clinical practice. Further research is required to explore and evaluate different models of organization and service provision that empower ‘generalists’ to provide palliative care, without resulting in deskilling. Finally, definitional clarity at an academic/policy level is also needed. [ABSTRACT FROM PUBLISHER]

Advance statements about medical care have been heralded by some as a solution to the problem of end of life decision making for people not able to participate in discussions about their care. Since death is now most likely to occur at the end of a long life, it is important to understand the views and values which older people express in relation to these. This paper reports on a study which used focus groups to explore older people's views about advance statements and the role these might play in end of life care decisions. Participants were 32 older people or their representatives who belonged to six diverse community groups in Sheffield, UK. Advance statements were understood primarily in terms of their potential to aid personal integrity and to help the families of older people by reducing the perceived 'burden' of their decision making. However, concerns were expressed about the perceived link between advance care statements and euthanasia, their future applicability, and the possibility that preferences for care may change. Participants also reported worries and difficulties related to thinking about and discussing death and dying. Trust between doctor and patient, built up over time, was perceived to be important in creating an environment in which the communication necessary to underpin advance care planning could take place. Lastly, participants did not perceive that during dying they would be ready necessarily to adhere to an advance statement and 'disengage' from their lives. We conclude that, rather than emphasising the completion of advance statements, it may be preferable to conceptualise advance care planning as a process of discussion and review between clinicians, patients and families., (Copyright 2003 Elsevier Ltd.)

Objectives: To explore the attitudes of older people towards home as a place of care when dying., Design: A two-phase qualitative study using focus groups and semi-structured interviews., Participants: Eight focus group discussions were held with 32 participants recruited from six purposively selected community groups representing older people in Sheffield, UK. A further 16 men and 29 women participated in semi-structured interviews., Results: Participants identified that home was more than a physical location, representing familiarity, comfort and the presence of loved ones. While participants anticipated that home would be their ideal place of care during dying, practical and moral problems associated with it were recognised by many. Some had no informal carer. Others did not want to be a 'burden' to family and friends, or were worried about these witnessing their suffering. Those who had children did not wish them to deliver care that was unduly intimate. Concerns were expressed about the quality of care that could be delivered at home, particularly in relation to accommodating health technologies and providing adequate symptom relief. Worries were also expressed about those living in poor material circumstances. Mixed views were expressed about the presence of professional carers within the home. Although they were seen to provide much needed support for the informal carer, the presence of 'strangers' was regarded by some as intrusive and compromising the ideal of 'home'., Discussion: Older people perceive factors they associate with 'home' as crucial to a good death, most notably presence of friends and family, but many anticipate that they would prefer to be cared for elsewhere when dying. These findings run counter to assumptions that the medicalised, institutional death cannot be a 'good death'. It is important that dying in hospital is not demonized, but rather efforts made to examine how institutional deaths can take on a more meaningful quality.