ArticleBMJ supportive & palliative care2021
Physicians' views on the usefulness and feasibility of identifying and disclosing patients' last phase of life: a focus group study.
Article in BMJ supportive & palliative care, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.
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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Promising Concept, Challenging Implementation of a Minimally Invasive Intervention (MINI) to Identify Patients in Their Last Year of Life-A Multi-Methods Feasibility Study at a German University Hospital.Healthcare (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Quality of hospital discharge letters for patients at the end of life: A retrospective medical record review.European journal of cancer care · 2022Article
- "Captive by the Uncertainty"-Experiences with Anticipatory Guidance for People Living with Dementia and Their Caregivers at a Specialty Dementia Clinic.Journal of Alzheimer's disease : JAD · 2022Article
- Discussing prognosis and the end of life with patients with advanced cancer or COPD: A qualitative study.PloS one · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectivesAccurate assessment that a patient is in the last phase of life is a prerequisite for timely initiation of palliative care in patients with a life-limiting disease, such as advanced cancer or advanced organ failure. Several palliative care quality standards recommend the surprise question (SQ) to identify those patients. Little is known about physicians' views on identifying and disclosing the last phase of life of patients with different illness trajectories.
methodsData from two focus groups were analysed using thematic analysis with a phenomenological approach.
resultsFifteen medical specialists and general practitioners participated. Participants thought prediction of patients' last phase of life, i.e. expected death within 1 year, is important. They seemed to find that prediction is more difficult in patients with advanced organ failure compared with cancer. The SQ was considered a useful prognostic tool; its use is facilitated by its simplicity but hampered by its subjective character. The medical specialist was considered mainly responsible for prognosticating and gradually disclosing the last phase. Participants' reluctance to such disclosure was related to uncertainty around prognostication, concerns about depriving patients of hope, affecting the physician-patient relationship, or a lack of time or availability of palliative care services.
conclusionsPhysicians consider the assessment of patients' last phase of life important and support use of the SQ in patients with different illness trajectories. However, barriers in disclosing expected death are prognostic uncertainty, possible deprivation of hope, physician-patient relationship, and lack of time or palliative care services. Future studies should examine patients' preferences for those discussions.
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.