Skip to main content
Article thumbnail
Location of Repository

A national facilitation project to improve primary palliative care : impact of the Gold Standards Framework on process and self-ratings of quality\ud

By Jeremy Dale, Mila Petrova, Dan Munday, J. Koistinen-Harris, Ranjit Lall and K. Thomas


Background: Improving quality of end-of-life care is a key driver of UK policy. The Gold Standards Framework (GSF) for Palliative Care aims to strengthen primary palliative care through facilitating implementation of systematic clinical and organisational processes. \ud \ud Objectives: To describe the general practices that participated in the GSF programme in 2003–5 and the changes in process and perception of quality that occurred in the year following entry into the programme, and to identify factors associated with the extent of change. \ud \ud Methods: Participating practices completed a questionnaire at baseline and another approximately 12 months later. Data were derived from categorical questions about the implementation of 35 organisational and clinical processes, and self-rated assessments of quality, associated with palliative care provision. \ud \ud Participants: 1305 practices (total registered population almost 10 million). Follow-up questionnaire completed by 955 (73.2%) practices (after mean (SD) 12.8 (2.8) months; median 13 months). \ud \ud Findings: Mean increase in total number of processes implemented (maximum = 35) was 9.6 (95% CI 9.0 to 10.2; p<0.001; baseline: 15.7 (SD 6.4), follow-up: 25.2 (SD 5.2)). Extent of change was largest for practices with low baseline scores. Aspects of process related to coordination and communication showed the greatest change. All dimensions of quality improved following GSF implementation; change was highest for the "quality of palliative care for cancer patients" and "confidence in assessing, recording and addressing the physical and psychosocial areas of patient care". \ud \ud Conclusion: Implementation of the GSF seems to have resulted in substantial improvements in process and quality of palliative care. Further research is required of the extent to which this has enhanced care (physical, practical and psychological outcomes) for patients and carers

Topics: R1
Publisher: BMJ Group
Year: 2009
OAI identifier:

Suggested articles


  1. Accuracy of responses from postal surveys about continuing medical education and information behaviour: experiences from a survey among German diabetologists.
  2. (2003). Caring for the dying at home: companions on the journey. doi
  3. Choice and place of death: individual preferences, uncertainty, and the availability of care. doi
  4. Developing primary palliative care. doi
  5. (2006). End of Life Care Programme. The Gold Standards Framework. doi
  6. (2002). Epidemiological studies: a practical guide. Cambridge: doi
  7. (1999). Evidence of self-report bias in assessing adherence to guidelines. doi
  8. (2007). Facilitating good process in primary palliative care: does the Gold Standards Framework enable quality performance? Fam Pract doi
  9. (2004). for Clinical Excellence. Guidance on cancer services: improving supportive and palliative care for adults. London: National Institute for Clinical Excellence,
  10. Good end-of-life care according to patients and their GPs.
  11. (2006). Health. Our health, our care, our say: a new direction for community services. London: Department of Health, doi
  12. (2006). How do people with cancer wish to be cared for in primary care? Serial discussion groups of patients and carers. Fam Pract doi
  13. Identification of stroke in the community: a comparison of three methods.
  14. Improving the delivery of palliative care in general practice: an evaluationofthefirstphaseoftheGoldStandardsFramework.PalliatMed2007;21:49–53. doi
  15. (2009). Interprofessional relationships and communication in primary palliative care: impact of the Gold Standards Framework. doi
  16. (2005). Now nobody falls through the net’’: practitioners’ perspectives on the Gold Standards Framework for community palliative care. Palliat Med doi
  17. Palliative care in the community. doi
  18. Population-based study of place of death of patients with cancer: implications for GPs.
  19. (2000). Remembering what happened: memory errors and survey reports. In:
  20. (2000). The science of self reports: implications for research and practice. Mahwah: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates,
  21. (2000). Why are trials in palliative care so difficult? Palliat Med doi

To submit an update or takedown request for this paper, please submit an Update/Correction/Removal Request.