Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35983954›Full record

ArticleSociology of health & illness2022

Standardising care of the dying: An ethnographic analysis of the Liverpool Care Pathway in England and the Netherlands.

Erica Borgstrom, Natashe Lemos Dekker

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Sociology of health & illness, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Erica BorgstromSchool of Health, Wellbeing and Social Care, The Open University, Milton Keynes, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-1009-2928
Natashe Lemos DekkerInstitute of Cultural Anthropology and Development Sociology, Leiden University, Leiden, The Netherlands.

Funding

Department of Health
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient (LCP) was a prominent set of guidance in the late 2000s and early 2010s within palliative and end-of-life care. Developed in England to improve the care of dying patients, it was later adopted in 20 counties. After a public scandal, it was removed from practice in England but remains in other locations, including the Netherlands. Drawing on two sets of ethnographic data, from England and the Netherlands, we consider the ways in which the LCP was engaged with as a form of standardisation aimed at improving practice, how it was deployed in relation to other forms of knowledge, and the political and moral statements that are being made through the (selective) use of it. Looking into the use of the LCP shows that, while the LCP attempts to standardise some of the values associated with palliative care, there are significant differences between how these standardised values are then enacted in different institutional and national contexts and by different individual care professionals. We conclude that the LCP was used to impart moral values, establish protocols of care, and demonstrate professionalism, showing the multiplicity of the use of standards in healthcare practice.

Indexed as

Critical PathwaysTerminal CareDelivery of Health CareHumansNetherlandsPalliative Caredeathend of life careguidancepalliative carestandards

Identifiers

PMID35983954
PMCPMC11497328

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.