4.2 Review

Communication in palliative care: a review of recent literature

Journal

CURRENT OPINION IN ONCOLOGY
Volume 17, Issue 4, Pages 345-350

Publisher

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/01.cco.0000167735.26454.79

Keywords

communication; decision making; end-of-life care; information exchange; palliative care

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Purpose of review The quality of communication with patients, family, and team members is an extremely important element in palliative cancer care. The current paper reviews the literature on these topics as published in 2004. Recent findings Trust was found to be a major factor for relationship building. Information gathered by patient self-report is the method of choice, given improved insight in symptom prevalence, duration, frequency, and interference. Cultural factors in information giving, the optimal process and content, and the difficulty of conveying hope were addressed. Decision making in palliative care requires a complex integration of conceptual knowledge, ethical and legal implications, and communication skills. Aspects of manageability are explored. Although health care providers must communicate about emotions, the existential distress of cancer patients and carers often goes overlooked in the last phases of life. Summary Themes included the education of health care providers, the need to care for carers, and interdisciplinary communication. Little attention was given to the growing population of elderly patients. Observer-based studies are unfortunately scarce, making the practice of palliative communication unseen. Finally, few studies report the cost-effectiveness of palliative care interventions though such studies may enhance palliative care and convince policy makers of the need to support such care. More empirical work is needed to improve the level of quality needed to ensure a good remaining lifetime for cancer patients whose disease cannot be cured.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.2
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available