ArticleBMJ supportive & palliative care2018
Crash course in EPaCCS (Electronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems): 8 years of successes and failures in patient data sharing to learn from.
Article in BMJ supportive & palliative care, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 39 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
39 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Electronic palliative care coordination systems (EPaCCS): a systematic review.BMJ supportive & palliative care · 2020Pooled it
- Article
- Systemic Strategies to Prevent Nonbeneficial Treatments Near the End of Life.JAMA network open · 2025Article
- Article
- Advance care planning before and during the COVID-19 pandemic: an observational cohort study of 73 675 patients' records.BJGP open · 2024Article
- Factors Influencing the Implementation of Digital Advance Care Planning: Qualitative Interview Study.Journal of medical Internet research · 2024Article
- Views of patients with progressive illness and carers about the role of digital advance care planning systems to record and share information: A qualitative study.Palliative medicine · 2024Article
- End-of-life care in the intensive care unit: the optimal process of decision to withdrawing life-sustaining treatment based on the Korean medical environment and culture.Acute and critical care · 2024Article
- Article
- Digital advance care planning with severe mental illness: a retrospective observational cohort analysis of the use of an electronic palliative care coordination system.BMC palliative care · 2024Observational
- Accuracy of clinical predictions of prognosis at the end-of-life: evidence from routinely collected data in urgent care records.BMC palliative care · 2023Observational
- Towards cataloguing and characterising advance care planning and end-of-life care resources.BMC palliative care · 2022Article
- Delivery and outcomes of end-of-life care in the Australian context: Experiences and reflections of general practitioners.Health & social care in the community · 2022Article
- Derivation and performance of an end-of-life practice score aimed at interpreting worldwide treatment-limiting decisions in the critically ill.Critical care (London, England) · 2022Observational
- Views of advance care planning in caregivers of older hospitalised patients following an emergency admission: A qualitative study.Journal of health psychology · 2022Article
- Provision of end-of-life care in primary care: a survey of issues and outcomes in the Australian context.BMJ open · 2022Article
- Article
- Views of advance care planning in older hospitalized patients following an emergency admission: A qualitative study.PloS one · 2022Article
- Service change and innovation in community end-of-life care during the COVID-19 pandemic: Qualitative analysis of a nationwide primary care survey.Palliative medicine · 2022Article
- Doctors' Views on How to Improve Communication and Quality of Care for Patients Experiencing End-of-Life: A Qualitative Descriptive Study.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundElectronic Palliative Care Coordination Systems (EPaCCS) are England's pre-eminent initiative in enabling advance care planning and improved communication and coordination at the end of life. EPaCCS have been under development for 8 years after being proposed, as Locality Registers, in the 2008 End of Life Care Strategy for England. EPaCCS are electronic registers or tools and processes for sharing data which aim to enable access to information about dying patients. Striking outcomes have been reported around EPaCCS, such as 77.8% of 'Coordinate My Care' patients dying in their preferred place. EPaCCS have, however, been extremely challenging to develop and implement, with many projects remaining continuously 'under development' or folding. They also continue to be suboptimally integrated with other data sharing initiatives. Rigorous research is non-existent. DISCUSSION POINTS: We discuss the current EPaCCS landscape and way forward. We summarise key facts concerning the availability, uptake, outcomes and costs of EPaCCS. We outline 5 key challenges (scope of projects, unrealistic expectations set by existing guidance, the discrepancy between IT realities in healthcare and our broader lives, information governance and 'death register' associations) and 6 key drivers (robust concept, striking outcomes, national support and strong clinical leadership, clinician commitment, education and funding).
conclusionsThe priorities for advancing EPaCCS we propose include linking to other work streams and reframing the concept, potentially making it less 'end of life', overview of current EPaCCS and lessons learnt, continuing work on information standards, rethinking of national funding and new levels of individual and community involvement.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.