Outcomes of clinical ethics support near the end of life: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Clinical ethics support services have been advocated in recent decades. In clinical practice, clinical ethics support services are often requested for difficult decisions near the end of life. However, their contribution to improving healthcare has been questioned and demands for evaluation have been put forward. Research indicates that there are considerable challenges associated with defining adequate outcomes for clinical ethics support services. In this systematic review, we report findings of qualitative studies and surveys, which have been conducted to evaluate clinical ethics support services near the end of life. METHODS: Electronic databases and other sources were queried from 1970 to May 2018. Two authors screened studies independently. Methodological quality of studies was assessed. For each arm of the review, an individual synthesis was performed. Prospero ID: CRD42016036241. ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS: Ethical approval is not needed as it is a systematic review of published literature. RESULTS: In all, 2088 hits on surveys and 2786 on qualitative studies were found. After screening, nine surveys and four qualitative studies were included. Survey studies report overall positive findings using a very wide and heterogeneous range of outcomes. Negative results were reported only occasionally. However, methodological quality and conceptual justification of used outcomes was often weak and limits generalizability of results. CONCLUSION: Evidence points to positive outcomes of clinical ethics support services. However, methodological quality needs to be improved. Further qualitative or mixed-method research on evaluating clinical ethics support services may contribute to the development of evaluating outcomes of clinical ethics support services by means of broaden the range of appropriate (process-oriented) outcomes of (different types of) clinical ethics support services.

Ethical case interventions for adult patients.

BACKGROUND: Decisions in clinical medicine can be associated with ethical challenges. Ethical case interventions (e.g. ethics committee, moral case deliberation) identify and analyse ethical conflicts which occur within the context of care for patients. Ethical case interventions involve ethical experts, different health professionals as well as the patient and his/her family. The aim is to support decision-making in clinical practice. This systematic review gathered and critically appraised the available evidence of controlled studies on the effectiveness of ethical case interventions. OBJECTIVES: To determine whether ethical case interventions result in reduced decisional conflict or moral distress of those affected by an ethical conflict in clinical practice; improved patient involvement in decision-making and a higher quality of life in adult patients. To determine the most effective models of ethical case interventions and to analyse the use and appropriateness of the outcomes in experimental studies. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the following electronic databases for primary studies to September 2018: CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL and PsycINFO. We also searched CDSR and DARE for related reviews. Furthermore, we searched Clinicaltrials.gov, International Clinical Trials Registry Platform Search Portal and conducted a cited reference search for all included studies in ISI WEB of Science. We also searched the references of the included studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised trials, non-randomised trials, controlled before-after studies and interrupted time series studies which compared ethical case interventions with usual care or an active control in any language. The included population were adult patients. However, studies with mixed populations consisting of adults and children were included, if a subgroup or sensitivity analysis (or both) was performed for the adult population. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane and the Effective Practice and Organisation of Care review group. We used meta-analysis based on a random-effects model for treatment costs and structured analysis for the remaining outcomes, because these were heterogeneously reported. We used the GRADE approach to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: We included four randomised trials published in six articles. The publication dates ranged from 2000 to 2014. Three studies were conducted in the USA, and one study in Taiwan. All studies were conducted on intensive care units and included 1165 patients. We judged the included studies to be of moderate or high risk of bias. It was not possible to compare different models of the intervention regarding effectiveness due to the diverse character of the interventions and the small number of studies. Included studies did not directly measure the main outcomes. All studies received public funding and one received additional funding from private sources.We identified two models of ethical case interventions: proactive and request-based ethics consultation. Three studies evaluated proactive ethics consultation (n = 1103) of which one study reported findings on one key outcome criterion. The studies did not report data on decisional conflict, moral distress of participants of ethical case interventions, patient involvement in decision-making, quality of life or ethical competency for proactive ethics consultation. One study assessed satisfaction with care on a 5-point Likert scale (1 = lowest rating, 5 = highest rating). The healthcare providers (nurses and physicians, n = 365) scored a value of 4 or 5 for 81.4% in the control group and 86.1% in the intervention group (P > 0.05). The patients or their surrogates (n = 275) scored a value of 4 or 5 for 83.6% in the control group and for 74.8% in the intervention group (P > 0.05). It was uncertain whether proactive ethics consultation led to high satisfaction with care, because the certainty of evidence was very low.One study evaluated request-based ethics consultation (n = 62). The study indirectly measured decisional conflict by assessing consensus regarding patient care. The risk (increase in consensus, reduction in decisional conflict) increased by 80% as a result of the intervention. The risk ratio was 0.20 (95% confidence interval 0.09 to 0.46; P < 0.01). It was uncertain whether request-based ethics consultation reduced decisional conflict, because the certainty of evidence was very low. The study did not report data on moral distress of participants of ethical case interventions, patient involvement in decision-making, quality of life, or ethical competency or satisfaction with care for request-based ethics consultation. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: It is not possible to determine the effectiveness of ethical case interventions with certainty due to the low certainty of the evidence of included studies in this review. The effectiveness of ethical case interventions should be investigated in light of the outcomes reported in this systematic review. In addition, there is need for further research to identify and measure outcomes which reflect the goals of different types of ethical case intervention.

Do we understand the intervention? What complex intervention research can teach us for the evaluation of clinical ethics support services (CESS).

BACKGROUND: Evaluating clinical ethics support services (CESS) has been hailed as important research task. At the same time, there is considerable debate about how to evaluate CESS appropriately. The criticism, which has been aired, refers to normative as well as empirical aspects of evaluating CESS. MAIN BODY: In this paper, we argue that a first necessary step for progress is to better understand the intervention(s) in CESS. Tools of complex intervention research methodology may provide relevant means in this respect. In a first step, we introduce principles of "complex intervention research" and show how CESS fulfil the criteria of "complex interventions". In a second step, we develop a generic "conceptual framework" for "ethics consultation on request" as standard for many forms of ethics consultation in clinical ethics practice. We apply this conceptual framework to the model of "bioethics mediation" to make explicit the specific structural and procedural elements of this form of ethics consultation on request. In a final step we conduct a comparative analysis of two different types of CESS, which have been subject to evaluation research: "proactive ethics consultation" and "moral case deliberation" and discuss implications for evaluating both types of CESS. CONCLUSION: To make explicit different premises of implemented CESS interventions by means of conceptual frameworks can inform the search for sound empirical evaluation of CESS. In addition, such work provides a starting point for further reflection about what it means to offer "good" CESS.

Professional caregivers' experiences with the Liverpool Care Pathway in dementia: An ethnographic study in a Dutch nursing home.

ABSTRACTObjective:There are few studies on how professional caregivers apply the Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP) in nursing home care for people with dementia. Further, despite critiques in the United Kingdom, the LCP continues to be used in the Netherlands, while, to the best of our knowledge, no studies have been conducted since its implementation. The purpose of the present study was to analyze professional caregivers' experiences with the LCP in this context. METHOD: This article draws on an ethnographic study. Data collection was based on 4 months of ethnographic fieldwork in 2015 in 11 psychogeriatric units of a nursing home in a rural area of the Netherlands. Data collection included participant observation and 25 semistructured audiotaped interviews with specialist elderly care physicians, nursing staff, and a nurse practitioner. RESULTS: We found that professional caregivers appreciate the LCP as a communication tool and as a reminder of care goals. However, the document was deemed too complicated and to cause duplication of work. It was also reported that the LCP did not cover the complexity of care needs that emerge in practice. Actual care needs were prioritized over the LCP, which calls its contribution into question. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Overall, the LCP does not match the context of dementia care in the nursing home. While it could be argued that the LCP does not intend to replace good care, its benefits as a reminder and a communication tool need continued consideration in relation to the amount of work it requires as a bureaucratic obligation.

Home palliative care works: but how? A meta-ethnography of the experiences of patients and family caregivers.

OBJECTIVE: To understand patients and family caregivers' experiences with home palliative care services, in order to identify, explore and integrate the key components of care that shape the experiences of service users. METHODS: We performed a meta-ethnography of qualitative evidence following PRISMA recommendations for reporting systematic reviews. The studies were retrieved in 5 electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycInfo, BNI, CINAHL) using 3 terms and its equivalents ('Palliative', 'Home care', 'Qualitative research') combined with 'AND', complemented with other search strategies. We included original qualitative studies exploring experiences of adult patients and/or their family caregivers (≥18 years) facing life-limiting diseases with palliative care needs, being cared for at home by specialist or intermediate home palliative care services. RESULTS: 28 papers reporting 19 studies were included, with 814 participants. Of these, 765 were family caregivers and 90% were affected by advanced cancer. According to participants' accounts, there are 2 overarching components of home palliative care: presence (24/7 availability and home visits) and competence (effective symptom control and skilful communication), contributing to meet the core need for security. Feeling secure is central to the benefits experienced with each component, allowing patients and family caregivers to focus on the dual process of living life and preparing death at home. CONCLUSIONS: Home palliative care teams improve patients and caregivers experience of security when facing life-limiting illnesses at home, by providing competent care and being present. These teams should therefore be widely available and empowered with the resources to be present and provide competent care.

Operationalising ethical challenges in dementia research-a systematic review of current evidence.

Background: the worldwide number of dementia cases is increasing, and this is a trend that is expected to continue as a growing proportion of the population ages. However, conducting research with persons suffering from dementia can be fraught due to fears surrounding research risks in vulnerable populations. This can make seeking approval for studies difficult. As research directly involving persons with dementia is key for the development of evidence-based best practice, the development of a coherent ethical strategy to perform such research feasibly and effectively is of paramount importance. Objective: this paper aims to review and synthesise ethical challenges in performing research with persons who have dementia. Methods: in undertaking a systematic review of the current research literature, we will identify the central issues and arguments characterising research that concerns the ethical dimensions of research participation in the dementia population. Data were analysed using both inductive and deductive content analysis. Ethical considerations in research involving persons with dementia primarily concern the representation of the interests of the person with dementia and protection of their vulnerabilities and rights. Results: a total of 2,894 results were returned from initial searches, following deduplication. In total, 2,458 were excluded at title review, and following abstract review 158 papers remained; 29 papers were included for analysis after full paper review and data extraction. Papers ranged between 1995 and 2013. Conclusion: this review has highlighted a lack of consensus in current research and guidelines addressing these concerns; a clear stance on ethical governance of studies is important for future research and best evidence-based practice in dementia.

Dignity Through Integrated Symptom Management: Lessons From the Breathlessness Support Service.

CONTEXT: Dignity is poorly conceptualized and little empirically explored in end-of-life care. A qualitative evaluation of a service offering integrated palliative and respiratory care for patients with advanced disease and refractory breathlessness uncovered an unexpected outcome, it enhanced patients' dignity. OBJECTIVES: To analyze what constitutes dignity for people suffering from refractory breathlessness with advanced disease, and its implications for the concept of dignity. METHODS: Qualitative study of cross-sectional interviews with 20 patients as part of a Phase III evaluation of a randomized controlled fast-track trial. The interviews were transcribed verbatim, imported into NVivo, and analyzed through constant comparison. The findings were compared with Chochinov et al.'s dignity model. The model was adapted with the themes and subthemes specific to patients suffering from breathlessness. RESULTS: The findings of this study underscore the applicability of the conceptual model of dignity for patients with breathlessness. There were many similarities in themes and subthemes. Differences specifically relevant for patients suffering from severe breathlessness were as follows: 1) physical distress and psychological mechanisms are interlinked with the disability and dependence breathlessness causes, in the illness-related concerns, 2) stigma is an important component of the social dignity inventory, 3) conditions and perspectives need to be present to practice self-care in the dignity-conserving repertoire. CONCLUSION: Dignity is an integrated concept and can be affected by influences from other areas such as illness-related concerns. The intervention shows that targeting the symptom holistically and equipping patients with the means for self-care realized the outcome of dignity.

"I Can Breathe Again!" Patients' Self-Management Strategies for Episodic Breathlessness in Advanced Disease, Derived From Qualitative Interviews.

CONTEXT: Episodic breathlessness causes additional distress to breathless patients with advanced disease, but management is still insufficient and there is a lack of knowledge on effective coping strategies. OBJECTIVES: The aim was to explore patients' self-management strategies for episodic breathlessness. METHODS: In-depth interviews with patients suffering from episodic breathlessness as a result of chronic heart failure, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, lung cancer, or motor neuron disease were conducted. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analyzed guided by the analytic hierarchy of Framework analysis. RESULTS: A total of 51 participants were interviewed (15 chronic heart failure, 14 chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 13 lung cancer, and nine motor neuron disease; age, mean [SD], 68 [12], 41% women, median Karnofsky index 60%). They described six main strategies for coping with episodes of breathlessness: reduction of physical exertion, cognitive and psychological strategies, breathing techniques and positions, air and oxygen, drugs and medical devices, and environmental and other strategies. Some strategies were used in an opposing way, e.g., concentrating on the breathing vs. distraction from any thoughts of breathlessness or laying down flat vs. standing up and raising hands. CONCLUSION: Patients used a number of different strategies to cope with episodic breathlessness, adding more detailed understanding of existing strategies for breathlessness. The findings, therefore, may provide a valuable aid for health care providers, affected patients, and their relatives.

Breathlessness and crises in the context of advanced illness: A comparison between COPD and lung cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study was to explore and contrast the experience and meaning of breathlessness in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) or lung cancer at the end of life. METHOD: We conducted a qualitative study embedded in a longitudinal study using topic-guided in-depth interviews with a purposive sample of patients suffering from breathlessness affecting their daily activities due to advanced (primary or secondary) lung cancer or COPD stage III/IV. All interviews were audiotaped, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using framework analysis. RESULTS: Ten COPD and eight lung cancer patients were interviewed. Both groups reported similarities in their experience. These included exertion through breathlessness throughout the illness course, losses in their daily activities, and the experience of breathlessness leading to crises. The main difference was the way in which patients adapted to their particular illness experience and the resulting crises over time. While COPD patients more likely sought to get their life with breathlessness under control, speaking of daily living with breathlessness under certain conditions, the participating lung cancer patients often faced the possibility of death and expressed a need for security. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: Breathlessness leads to crises in patients with advanced disease. Although experiences of patients are similar, reactions and coping mechanisms vary and are more related to the disease and the stage of disease.

An integrated palliative and respiratory care service for patients with advanced disease and refractory breathlessness: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Breathlessness is a common and distressing symptom, which increases in many diseases as they progress and is difficult to manage. We assessed the effectiveness of early palliative care integrated with respiratory services for patients with advanced disease and refractory breathlessness. METHODS: In this single-blind randomised trial, we enrolled consecutive adults with refractory breathlessness and advanced disease from three large teaching hospitals and via general practitioners in South London. We randomly allocated (1:1) patients to receive either a breathlessness support service or usual care. Randomisation was computer generated centrally by the independent Clinical Trials Unit in a 1:1 ratio, by minimisation to balance four potential confounders: cancer versus non-cancer, breathlessness severity, presence of an informal caregiver, and ethnicity. The breathlessness support service was a short-term, single point of access service integrating palliative care, respiratory medicine, physiotherapy, and occupational therapy. Research interviewers were masked as to which patients were in the treatment group. Our primary outcome was patient-reported breathlessness mastery, a quality of life domain in the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire, at 6 weeks. All analyses were by intention to treat. Survival was a safety endpoint. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01165034. FINDINGS: Between Oct 22, 2010 and Sept 28, 2012, 105 consenting patients were randomly assigned (53 to breathlessness support service and 52 to usual care). 83 of 105 (78%) patients completed the assessment at week 6. Mastery in the breathlessness support service group improved compared with the control (mean difference 0·58, 95% CI 0·01-1·15, p=0·048; effect size 0·44). Sensitivity analysis found similar results. Survival rate from randomisation to 6 months was better in the breathlessness support service group than in the control group (50 of 53 [94%] vs 39 of 52 [75%]) and in overall survival (generalised Wilcoxon 3·90, p=0·048). Survival differences were significant for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease and interstitial lung disease but not cancer. INTERPRETATION: The breathlessness support service improved breathlessness mastery. Our findings provide robust evidence to support the early integration of palliative care for patients with diseases other than cancer and breathlessness as well as those with cancer. The improvement in survival requires further investigation. FUNDING: UK National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) and Cicely Saunders International.

Priorities for treatment, care and information if faced with serious illness: a comparative population-based survey in seven European countries.

BACKGROUND: Health-care costs are growing, with little population-based data about people's priorities for end-of-life care, to guide service development and aid discussions. AIM: We examined variations in people's priorities for treatment, care and information across seven European countries. DESIGN: Telephone survey of a random sample of households; we asked respondents their priorities if 'faced with a serious illness, like cancer, with limited time to live' and used multivariable logistic regressions to identify associated factors. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Members of the general public aged ≥ 16 years residing in England, Flanders, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain. RESULTS: In total, 9344 individuals were interviewed. Most people chose 'improve quality of life for the time they had left', ranging from 57% (95% confidence interval: 55%-60%, Italy) to 81% (95% confidence interval: 79%-83%, Spain). Only 2% (95% confidence interval: 1%-3%, England) to 6% (95% confidence interval: 4%-7%, Flanders) said extending life was most important, and 15% (95% confidence interval: 13%-17%, Spain) to 40% (95% confidence interval: 37%-43%, Italy) said quality and extension were equally important. Prioritising quality of life was associated with higher education in all countries (odds ratio = 1.3 (Flanders) to 7.9 (Italy)), experience of caregiving or bereavement (England, Germany, Portugal), prioritising pain/symptom control over having a positive attitude and preferring death in a hospice/palliative care unit. Those prioritising extending life had the highest home death preference of all groups. Health status did not affect priorities. CONCLUSIONS: Across all countries, extending life was prioritised by a minority, regardless of health status. Treatment and care needs to be reoriented with patient education and palliative care becoming mainstream for serious conditions such as cancer.

Learning from the public: citizens describe the need to improve end-of-life care access, provision and recognition across Europe.

BACKGROUND: Despite ageing populations and increasing cancer deaths, many European countries lack national policies regarding palliative and end-of-life care. The aim of our research was to determine public views regarding end-of-life care in the face of serious illness. METHODS: Implementation of a pan-European population-based survey with adults in England, Belgium (Flanders), Germany, Italy, The Netherlands, Portugal and Spain. Three stages of analysis were completed on open-ended question data: (i) inductive analysis to determine a category-code framework; (ii) country-level manifest deductive content analysis; and (iii) thematic analysis to identify cross-country prominent themes. RESULTS: Of the 9344 respondents, 1543 (17%) answered the open-ended question. Two prominent themes were revealed: (i) a need for improved quality of end-of-life and palliative care, and access to this care for patients and families and (ii) the recognition of the importance of death and dying, the cessation of treatments to extend life unnecessarily and the need for holistic care to include comfort and support. CONCLUSIONS: Within Europe, the public recognizes the importance of death and dying; they are concerned about the prioritization of quantity of life over quality of life; and they call for improved quality of end-of-life and palliative care for patients, especially for elderly patients, and families. To fulfil the urgent need for a policy response and to advance research and care, we suggest four solutions for European palliative and end-of-life care: institute government-led national strategies; protect regional research funding; consider within- and between-country variance; establish standards for training, education and service delivery.

Choosing care homes as the least preferred place to die: a cross-national survey of public preferences in seven European countries.

BACKGROUND: Care homes are increasingly becoming places where people spend the final stages of their lives and eventually die. This trend is expected to continue due to population ageing, yet little is known about public preferences regarding this setting. As part of a larger study examining preferences and priorities for end of life care, we investigated the extent to which care homes are chosen as the least preferred place of death, and the factors associated with this negative preference. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional telephone survey among 9,344 adults from random private households in England, Flanders, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Portugal and Spain. We asked participants where they would least prefer to die in a situation of serious illness with less than one year to live. Multivariate binary logistic regressions were used to identify factors associated with choosing care homes as the least preferred place of death in each country. RESULTS: Care homes were the most frequently mentioned least preferred place of death in the Netherlands (41.5%), Italy and Spain (both 36.7%) and the second most frequent in England (28.0%), Portugal (25.8%), Germany (23.7%) and Flanders (18.9%). Only two factors had a similar and significant effect on the least preferred place of death in more than one country. In Germany and the Netherlands those doing housework were less likely to choose care homes as their least preferred place (AOR 0.72; 95% CI:0.54-0.96 and AOR 0.68; 95% CI:0.52-0.90 respectively), while those born in the country where the survey took place were more likely to choose care homes (AOR 1.77; 95% CI:1.05-2.99 and AOR 1.74; 95% CI:1.03-2.95 respectively). Experiences of serious illness, death and dying were not associated with the preference. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest it might be difficult to promote care homes as a good place to die. This is an urgent research area in order to meet needs and preferences of a growing number of older people with chronic, debilitating conditions across Europe. From a research perspective and in order to allow people to be cared for and die where they wish, our findings highlight the need to build more in depth evidence on reasons underlying this negative preference.

Diversity in defining end of life care: an obstacle or the way forward?

AIM: The terms used to describe care at the end of life (EoL), and its definitions, have evolved over time and reflect the changes in meaning the concept has undergone as the field develops. We explore the remit of EoL care as defined by experts in EoL care, from across Europe and beyond, to understand its current usage and meanings. METHOD: A qualitative survey attached to a call for expertise on cultural issues in EoL care was sent to experts in the field identified through the literature, European EoL care associations, and conferences targeted at EoL care professionals. Respondents were asked to identify further contacts for snowball recruitment.The responses were analysed using content and discourse analysis. RESULTS: Responses were received from 167 individuals (33% response rate), mainly from academics (39%) and clinical practitioners working in an academic context (23%) from 19 countries in Europe and beyond. 29% of respondents said explicitly that there was no agreed definition of EoL care in practice and only 14% offered a standard definition (WHO, or local institution). 2% said that the concept of EoL care was not used in their country, and 5% said that there was opposition to the concept for religious or cultural reasons. Two approaches were identified to arrive at an understanding of EoL care: exclusively by drawing boundaries through setting time frames, and inclusively by approaching its scope in an integrative way. This led to reflections about terminology and whether defining EoL care is desirable. CONCLUSION: The global expansion of EoL care contributes to the variety of interpretations of what it means. This complicates the endeavour of defining the field. However, when diversity is taken seriously it can open up new perspectives to underpin the ethical framework of EoL care.

'Peace' and 'life worthwhile' as measures of spiritual well-being in African palliative care: a mixed-methods study.

BACKGROUND: Patients with incurable, progressive disease receiving palliative care in sub-Saharan Africa experience high levels of spiritual distress with a detrimental impact on their quality of life. Locally validated measurement tools are needed to identify patients' spiritual needs and evaluate and improve spiritual care, but up to now such tools have been lacking in Africa. The African Palliative Care Association (APCA) African Palliative Outcome Scale (POS) contains two items relating to peace and life worthwhile. We aimed to determine the content and construct validity of these items as measures of spiritual wellbeing in African palliative care populations. METHODS: The study was conducted at five palliative care services, four in South Africa and one in Uganda. The mixed-methods study design involved: (1) cognitive interviews with 72 patients, analysed thematically to explore the items' content validity, and (2) quantitative data collection (n = 285 patients) using the POS and the Spirit 8 to assess construct validity. RESULTS: (1) Peace was interpreted according to the themes 'perception of self and world', 'relationship to others', 'spiritual beliefs' and 'health and healthcare'. Life worthwhile was interpreted in relation to 'perception of self and world', 'relationship to others' and 'identity'. (2) Conceptual convergence and divergence were also evident in the quantitative data: there was moderate correlation between peace and Spirit 8 spiritual well-being (r = 0.46), but little correlation between life worthwhile and Spirit 8 spiritual well-being (r = 0.18) (both p < 0.001). Correlations with Spirit 8 items were weak to moderate. CONCLUSIONS: Findings demonstrate the utility of POS items peace and life worthwhile as distinct but related measures of spiritual well-being in African palliative care. Peace and life worthwhile are brief and simple enough to be integrated into routine practice and can be used to measure this important but neglected outcome in this population.

The selection and use of outcome measures in palliative and end-of-life care research: the MORECare International Consensus Workshop.

CONTEXT: A major barrier to widening and sustaining palliative care service provision is the requirement for better selection and use of outcome measures. Service commissioning is increasingly based on patient, carer, and service outcomes as opposed to service activity. OBJECTIVES: To generate recommendations and consensus for research in palliative and end-of-life care on the properties of the best outcome measures, enhancing the validity of proxy-reported data and optimal data collection time points. METHODS: An international expert "workshop" was convened and an online consensus survey was undertaken using the MORECare Transparent Expert Consultation to generate recommendations and level of agreement. We focused on three areas: 1) measurement properties, 2) use of proxies, and 3) measurement timing. Data analysis comprised descriptive analysis of aggregate scores and collation of narrative comments. RESULTS: There were 31 workshop attendees; 29 recommendations were included in the online survey, completed by 28 experts. The top three recommendations by area were the following: 1) the properties of the best outcome measures are responsive to change over time and capture clinically important data, 2) to enhance the validity of proxy data requires clear and specific guidelines to aid lay individuals' and/or professionals' completion of proxy measures, and 3) data collection time points need clear identification to establish a baseline. CONCLUSION: Outcome measurement in palliative and end-of-life care requires the use of psychometrically robust measures that are clinically responsive, with defined data collection time points to establish a baseline and clear administration guidelines to complete proxy measures. To further the field requires clinical imperatives to more closely inform recommendations on outcome measurement.