Search

Context: Supplementary support services in palliative care for older people are increasingly common, but with neither recommended tools to measure outcomes nor reviews synthesizing anticipated outcomes. Common clinically focused tools may be less appropriate., Objectives: To identify stakeholder perceptions of key outcomes from supplementary palliative care support services, then map these onto outcome measurement tools to assess relevance and item redundancy., Methods: A scoping review using the design by Arksey and O'Malley. EMBASE, CINAHL, MEDLINE, and PSYCHinfo searched using terms relating to palliative care, qualitative research, and supplementary support interventions. Articles were imported into Endnote™, and Covidence™ was used by two reviewers to assess against inclusion criteria. Included articles were imported into NVivo™ and thematically coded to identify key concepts underpinning outcomes. Each item within contender outcome measurement tools was assessed against each concept., Results: Sixty included articles focused on advance care planning, guided conversations, and volunteer befriending services. Four concepts were identified: enriching relationships; greater autonomy and perceived control; knowing more; and improved mental health. Mapping concepts to contender tool items revealed issues of relevance and redundancy. Some tools had no redundant items but mapped only to two of four outcome themes; others mapped to all concepts, but with many redundant questions. Tools such as ICECAP-Supportive Care Measure and McGill Quality of Life had high relevance and low redundancy., Conclusion: Pertinent outcome concepts for these services and population are not well represented in commonly used outcome measurement tools, and this may have implications in appropriately measuring outcomes. This review and mapping method may have utility in fields where selecting appropriate outcome tools can be challenging., (Copyright © 2020 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Background: Identifying and approaching eligible participants for recruitment to research studies usually relies on healthcare professionals. This process is sometimes hampered by deliberate or inadvertent gatekeeping that can introduce bias into patient selection., Objectives: Our primary objective was to identify and assess the effect of strategies designed to help healthcare professionals to recruit participants to research studies., Search Methods: We performed searches on 5 January 2015 in the following electronic databases: Cochrane Methodology Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, British Nursing Index, PsycINFO, ASSIA and Web of Science (SSCI, SCI-EXPANDED) from 1985 onwards. We checked the reference lists of all included studies and relevant review articles and did citation tracking through Web of Science for all included studies., Selection Criteria: We selected all studies that evaluated a strategy to identify and recruit participants for research via healthcare professionals and provided pre-post comparison data on recruitment rates., Data Collection and Analysis: Two review authors independently screened search results for potential eligibility, read full papers, applied the selection criteria and extracted data. We calculated risk ratios for each study to indicate the effect of each strategy., Main Results: Eleven studies met our eligibility criteria and all were at medium or high risk of bias. Only five studies gave the total number of participants (totalling 7372 participants). Three studies used a randomised design, with the others using pre-post comparisons. Several different strategies were investigated. Four studies examined the impact of additional visits or information for the study site, with no increases in recruitment demonstrated. Increased recruitment rates were reported in two studies that used a dedicated clinical recruiter, and five studies that introduced an automated alert system for identifying eligible participants. The studies were embedded into trials evaluating care in oncology mainly but also in emergency departments, diabetes and lower back pain., Authors' Conclusions: There is no strong evidence for any single strategy to help healthcare professionals to recruit participants in research studies. Additional visits or information did not appear to increase recruitment by healthcare professionals. The most promising strategies appear to be those with a dedicated resource (e.g. a clinical recruiter or automated alert system) for identifying suitable participants that reduced the demand on healthcare professionals, but these were assessed in studies at high risk of bias., (Copyright © 2016 The Cochrane Collaboration. Published by John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.)

Selecting an appropriate research strategy is key to ensuring that research questions are addressed in a way which has value and is congruent with the overall topic, questions and purpose of the research. This paper will argue that there are situations when a case study strategy is appropriate to use in palliative care research. These include: when complex situations need to be addressed; when context is central to the study; when multiple perspectives need to be recognized; when the design needs to be flexible; when the research needs to be congruent with clinical practice; when there is no strong theory to which to appeal; and when other methodologies could be difficult to conduct. Using case study strategies rigorously and appropriately can contribute to knowledge in a way which is sensitive to the complex, context-dependent and multiprofessional nature of palliative care.