Palliative medicine
-
Palliative medicine · Apr 2010
ReviewReview: the use of proteomics as a research methodology for studying cancer-related fatigue: a review.
There is an increasing emphasis on using translational research to examine mechanisms and increase our understanding of disease. Translational research involves the use of basic science techniques to generate new treatments for use in a clinical setting - the so called 'bench to bedside' approach. ⋯ This review will examine specifically the potential role of the science of protein structure and function (proteomics) as a technique to improve our knowledge in this area. This will include an explanation of the specific methods used in this research in order to increase our understanding of the mechanisms of cancer-related fatigue and discuss potential directions for future research with the development of more targeted therapies.
-
National experts have recognized a need for increased research in pediatric palliative care. However, when conducting research it is important to use rigorous methods, report significant and non-significant findings, and include information on responders and non-responders. Most studies do not present information on non-responders, yet this is critical as the results many not be generalizable if there are inherent differences between the two groups. ⋯ However, we also found that of the Black, non-Hispanic parents who did not participate, their primary reason for doing so was that they had non-working or disconnected phone numbers. Only 3% of the Black, non-Hispanic parents who did not participate flatly refused. Information from this study can be used to design interventions aimed at increasing minority participation in pediatric palliative care research.
-
Palliative medicine · Mar 2010
ReviewReview: the quality of dying and death: a systematic review of measures.
To determine whether modern medicine is facilitating 'good' deaths, appropriate measures of the quality of dying and death must be developed and utilized. The purpose of this paper is to identify quality of dying and death measurement tools and to determine their quality. MEDLINE (1950-2008), Healthstar (1966-2008), and CINAHL (1982-2008) were searched using keyword terms 'quality of dying/death' and 'good/bad death'. ⋯ Of the six published measures reviewed, the Quality of Dying and Death questionnaire (QODD) is the most widely studied and best validated. Strategies to measure the quality of dying and death are becoming increasingly rigorous. Further research is required to understand the factors influencing the ratings of the quality of dying and death.
-
Palliative medicine · Mar 2010
Multicenter StudyEnd-of-life issues in acute stroke care: a qualitative study of the experiences and preferences of patients and families.
The aims of this qualitative study were to identify patients' and family members' experiences of acute stroke and their preferences for end-of-life care. Twenty-eight purposely sampled patients with an acute stroke who had high (n = 13) and low (n = 15) disability were selected from 191 sequential cases admitted to two general hospitals in north-east England. In addition, 25 family members of other stroke patients were recruited. ⋯ No family member reported being offered the possibility of the patient dying at home. Uncertainty about prognosis is inevitable in clinical practice, and this can be difficult for patients and families. Our findings demonstrate the importance of improving communication between patient, family and health professionals for seriously ill patients with stroke in UK hospitals.
-
Palliative medicine · Mar 2010
ReviewReview: a narrative review of the published ethical debates in palliative care research and an assessment of their adequacy to inform research governance.
The quality of research, and the resulting quality of evidence available to guide palliative care, is dependent on the ethical decisions underpinning its design, conduct and report. Whilst much has been published debating the ethics of palliative care research, an assessment of the quality and synthesis of the central debates is not available. Such a review is timely to inform research governance. ⋯ The debate was rich in quality and knowledge with respect to the protection of the dignity, rights and safety of research participants, but less developed in relation to those of researchers and other staff. There is also little debate about the ethics of reporting of research and the ethics underpinning research leadership. A framework is offered that reconciles the ethical issues raised with potential methodological strategies identified from the review.