Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24249255›Full record

SynthesisThe Cochrane database of systematic reviews2013

End-of-life care pathways for improving outcomes in caring for the dying.

Raymond J Chan, Joan Webster

Open access · bronzeAbstract readSystematic Review
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in The Cochrane database of systematic reviews, 2013. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 24 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
24citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

24 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 48 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Integrated Care Pathways and Care Bundles for Dementia in Acute Care: Concept Versus Evidence.American journal of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias · 2017
    Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. End-of-life care pathways for improving outcomes in caring for the dying.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2016
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Effects of Delayed Initiation of End-of-life Care in Terminally Ill Intensive Care Unit Patients.Indian journal of critical care medicine : peer-reviewed, official publication of Indian Society of Critical Care Medicine · 2020
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Raymond J ChanCancer Care Services, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Level 2, Building 34,, Butterfield Street, Brisbane, QLD, Australia, 4029.
Joan Webster
Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital · AU

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundThis is an updated version of a Cochrane review first published in Issue 1, 2010 of The Cochrane Library. In many clinical areas, integrated care pathways are utilised as structured multidisciplinary care plans that detail essential steps in caring for patients with specific clinical problems. In particular, care pathways for the dying have been developed as a model to improve care of patients who are in the last days of life. The care pathways were designed with an aim of ensuring that the most appropriate management occurs at the most appropriate time and that it is provided by the most appropriate health professional. There have been sustained concerns about the safety of implementing end-of-life care pathways, particularly in the UK. Therefore, there is a significant need for clinicians and policy makers to be informed about the effects of end-of-life care pathways with a systematic review.

objectivesTo assess the effects of end-of-life care pathways, compared with usual care (no pathway) or with care guided by another end-of-life care pathway across all healthcare settings (e.g. hospitals, residential aged care facilities, community).In particular, we aimed to assess the effects on symptom severity and quality of life of people who are dying; those related to the care such as families, carers and health professionals; or a combination of these. SEARCH

methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (Issue 6, 2013), MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, review articles and reference lists of relevant articles. We conducted the original search in September 2009, and the updated search in June 2013. SELECTION CRITERIA: All randomised controlled trials (RCTs), quasi-randomised trial or high-quality controlled before-and-after studies comparing use versus non-use of an end-of-life care pathway in caring for the dying. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors assessed the results of the searches against the predetermined criteria for inclusion. MAIN

resultsThe original review identified 920 titles. The updated search found 2042 potentially relevant titles (including the original 920), but no additional studies met criteria for inclusion in the review update. AUTHORS'

conclusionsWith sustained concerns about the safety of the pathway implementation and the lack of available evidence on important patient and relative outcomes, recommendations for the use of end-of-life pathways in caring for the dying cannot be made. Since the last version of this review, no new studies met criteria for inclusion in the review update. With recently documented concerns related to the potential adverse effects associated with Liverpool Care Pathway (the most commonly used end-of-life care pathway), we do not recommend decision making based on indirect or low-quality evidence. All health services using end-of-life care pathways are encouraged to have their use of the pathway, to date, independently audited. Any subsequent use should be based on carefully documented evaluations. Large RCTs or other well-designed controlled studies are urgently required for the evaluation of the use of end-of-life care pathways in caring for dying people in various clinical settings. In future studies, outcome measures should include benefits or harms concerning the outcomes of interest in this review in relation to patients, families, carers and health professionals.

Indexed as

Critical PathwaysTerminal CareHumansTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID24249255
OpenAlexW2774729641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.