Article Text
Abstract
Background Negative perceptions about palliative care (PC), held by patients with cancer and their families, are a barrier to early referral and the associated benefits. This review examines the approaches that support the task of introducing PC to patients and families and describes any evaluations of these approaches.
Methods A systematic review with a systematic search informed by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systemic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines was performed on the online databases MEDLINE, PsychInfo and CINAHL from May 2022 to July 2022. Identified studies were screened by title and abstract, and included if they were empirical studies and described an approach that supported the introduction of PC services for adult patients. A narrative-synthesis approach was used to extract and present the findings.
Results Searches yielded 1193 unique manuscripts, which, following title and abstract screening, were reduced to 31 papers subject to full-text review, with a final 12 studies meeting eligibility criteria. A diverse range of included studies described approaches used to introduce palliative care, which may be broadly summarised by four categories: education, clinical communication, building trust and rapport and integrative system approaches.
Conclusion While educational approaches were helpful, they were less likely to change behaviours, with focused communication tasks also necessary to facilitate PC introduction. An established relationship and trust between patient and clinician were foundational to effective PC discussions. A framework to assist clinicians in this task is likely to be multidimensional in nature, although more quantitative research is necessary to establish the most effective methods and how they may be incorporated into clinical practice.
- Supportive care
- Communication
- Cancer
- Education and training
Data availability statement
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.
Statistics from Altmetric.com
Data availability statement
All data relevant to the study are included in the article or uploaded as supplementary information.
Footnotes
X @AnnaLCollins
Contributors SP undertook data collection and analysis and led the writing of this paper. AC and JP were responsible for study conception and provided guidance regarding the search, methods, the identification of key themes and editing of the manuscript. JP is acting as the guarantor for this paper. SP, AC and JP attest that all listed authors meet authorship criteria and that no others meeting the criteria have been omitted.
Funding AC is funded by an Emerging Leadership Grant awarded by the National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC GNT1173054). The contents of the published material are solely the responsibility of the individual authors and do not reflect the views of the NHMRC, who had no role in the study conduct or interpretation of the results.
Competing interests The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest
Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; externally peer reviewed.
Supplemental material This content has been supplied by the author(s). It has not been vetted by BMJ Publishing Group Limited (BMJ) and may not have been peer-reviewed. Any opinions or recommendations discussed are solely those of the author(s) and are not endorsed by BMJ. BMJ disclaims all liability and responsibility arising from any reliance placed on the content. Where the content includes any translated material, BMJ does not warrant the accuracy and reliability of the translations (including but not limited to local regulations, clinical guidelines, terminology, drug names and drug dosages), and is not responsible for any error and/or omissions arising from translation and adaptation or otherwise.