Search

The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (Revised) (ESAS-r) contains 9 questions pertaining to symptoms/well-being. It is a standardized patient-reported assessment instrument, but inconsistently used in palliative care. Thus, a problem exists in knowledge translation regarding routine use of the ESAS-r in palliative practice. The objective was to understand clinicians' perspectives on the use of the ESAS-r in palliative care in hospitals and at home. Qualitative focus groups (n = 14 with 46 clinicians) and interviews (n = 24) elicited views regarding use of the ESAS-r in palliative practice. Interpretive description was used as a general approach to this qualitative analysis focused on understanding clinicians' views. Palliative clinicians presented multiple perspectives of the ESAS-r pertaining to their (1) underlying values, (2) disparate purposes, and (3) incommensurate responses toward use in daily practice. Benefits and challenges supported diversity within these themes, highlighting divergence among perspectives and complexity of integrating a standardized tool in patient care. Integration of the ESAS-r in palliative care requires (1) educational support for developing competence; (2) consideration of clinicians' existing, heterogeneous beliefs regarding the use of standardized assessment instruments; and (3) Consultation with multidisciplinary practitioners about optimal ways that ESAS-r results can be used in a person-centered approach to palliative care.

Background: Validated quality indicators can help health-care professionals to evaluate their medical practices in a comparative manner to deliver optimal clinical care. No international set of quality indicators to measure the organizational aspects of palliative care settings exists., Aim: To develop and validate a set of structure and process indicators for palliative care settings in Europe., Design: A two-round modified RAND Delphi process was conducted to rate clarity and usefulness of a previously developed set of 110 quality indicators., Setting/participants: In total, 20 multi-professional palliative care teams of centers of excellence from seven European countries., Results: In total, 56 quality indicators were rated as useful. These valid quality indicators concerned the following domains: the definition of a palliative care service (2 quality indicators), accessibility to palliative care (16 quality indicators), specific infrastructure to deliver palliative care (8 quality indicators), symptom assessment tools (1 quality indicator), specific personnel in palliative care services (9 quality indicators), documentation methodology of clinical data (14 quality indicators), evaluation of quality and safety procedures (1 quality indicator), reporting of clinical activities (1 quality indicator), and education in palliative care (4 quality indicator)., Conclusion: The modified RAND Delphi process resulted in 56 international face-validated quality indicators to measure and compare organizational aspects of palliative care. These quality indicators, aimed to assess and improve the organization of palliative care, will be pilot tested in palliative care settings all over Europe and be used in the EU FP7 funded IMPACT project.