A qualitative systematic review of service user and service provider perspectives on the acceptability, relative benefits, and potential harms of art therapy for people with non-psychotic mental health disorders.

PURPOSE: This systematic review aimed to synthesize qualitative evidence relating to user and service provider perspective on the acceptability and relative benefits and potential harms of art therapy for people with non-psychotic mental disorders. METHODS: A comprehensive literature search was conducted in 13 major bibliographic databases from May to July 2013. A qualitative evidence synthesis was conducted using thematic framework synthesis. RESULTS: The searches identified 10,270 citations from which 12 studies were included. Ten studies included data from 183 service users, and two studies included data from 16 service providers. The evidence demonstrated that art therapy was an acceptable treatment. The benefits associated with art therapy included the following: the development of relationships with the therapist and other group members; understanding the self/own illness/the future; gaining perspective; distraction; personal achievement; expression; relaxation; and empowerment. Small numbers of patients reported varying reasons for not wanting to take part, and some highlighted potentially negative effects of art therapy which included the evoking of feelings which could not be resolved. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that for the majority of respondents art therapy was an acceptable intervention, although this was not the case for all respondents. Therefore, attention should be focussed on both identifying those who are most likely to benefit from art therapy and ensuring any potential harms are minimized. The findings provide evidence to commissioners and providers of mental health services about the value of future art therapy services. PRACTITIONER POINTS: Art therapy was reported to be an acceptable treatment for the majority of respondents. Art therapy may not be a preferred treatment option for a small number of patients, emphasizing the importance of considering patient preference in choice of treatment, and selection of the most suitable patients for art therapy. Consideration should be made of adjustments to make art therapy inclusive, particularly for those with physical illnesses. Ensuring the competence of the deliverer, providing patients with additional support, such as other therapies if required, and ensuring continuity of care should be key considerations in service provision

A randomized phase II feasibility trial of a multimodal intervention for the management of cachexia in lung and pancreatic cancer

Peer reviewedPublisher PD

Do-not-attempt-cardiopulmonary-resuscitation decisions : an evidence synthesis

Background: Cardiac arrest is the final common step in the dying process. In the right context, resuscitation can reverse the dying process, yet success rates are low. However, cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) is a highly invasive medical treatment, which, if applied in the wrong setting, can deprive the patient of dignified death. Do-not-attempt-cardiopulmonary-resuscitation (DNACPR) decisions provide a mechanism to withhold CPR. Recent scientific and lay press reports suggest that the implementation of DNACPR decisions in NHS practice is problematic. Aims and objectives: This project sought to identify reasons why conflict and complaints arise, identify inconsistencies in NHS trusts’ implementation of national guidelines, understand health professionals’ experience in relation to DNACPR, its process and ethical challenges, and explore the literature for evidence to improve DNACPR policy and practice. Methods: A systematic review synthesised evidence of processes, barriers and facilitators related to DNACPR decision-making and implementation. Reports from NHS trusts, the National Reporting and Learning System, the Parliamentary and Health Service Ombudsman, the Office of the Chief Coroner, trust resuscitation policies and telephone calls to a patient information line were reviewed. Multiple focus groups explored service-provider perspectives on DNACPR decisions. A stakeholder group discussed the research findings and identified priorities for future research. Results: The literature review found evidence that structured discussions at admission to hospital or following deterioration improved patient involvement and decision-making. Linking DNACPR to overall treatment plans improved clarity about goals of care, aided communication and reduced harms. Standardised documentation improved the frequency and quality of recording decisions. Approximately 1500 DNACPR incidents are reported annually. One-third of these report harms, including some instances of death. Problems with communication and variation in trusts’ implementation of national guidelines were common. Members of the public were concerned that their wishes with regard to resuscitation would not be respected. Clinicians felt that DNACPR decisions should be considered within the overall care of individual patients. Some clinicians avoid raising discussions about CPR for fear of conflict or complaint. A key theme across all focus groups, and reinforced by the literature review, was the negative impact on overall patient care of having a DNACPR decision and the conflation of ‘do not resuscitate’ with ‘do not provide active treatment’. Limitations: The variable quality of some data sources allows potential overstatement or understatement of findings. However, data source triangulation identified common issues. Conclusion: There is evidence of variation and suboptimal practice in relation to DNACPR decisions across health-care settings. There were deficiencies in considering, discussing and implementing the decision, as well as unintended consequences of DNACPR decisions being made on other aspects of patient care. Future work: Recommendations supported by the stakeholder group are standardising NHS policies and forms, ensuring cross-boundary recognition of DNACPR decisions, integrating decisions with overall treatment plans and developing tools and training strategies to support clinician and patient decision-making, including improving communication. Study registration: This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42012002669. Funding: The National Institute for Health Research Health Services and Delivery Research programme

International evidence-based recommendations on ultrasound-guided vascular access

n/

Integration of oncology and palliative care : a Lancet Oncology Commission

Full integration of oncology and palliative care relies on the specific knowledge and skills of two modes of care: the tumour-directed approach, the main focus of which is on treating the disease; and the host-directed approach, which focuses on the patient with the disease. This Commission addresses how to combine these two paradigms to achieve the best outcome of patient care. Randomised clinical trials on integration of oncology and palliative care point to health gains: improved survival and symptom control, less anxiety and depression, reduced use of futile chemotherapy at the end of life, improved family satisfaction and quality of life, and improved use of health-care resources. Early delivery of patient-directed care by specialist palliative care teams alongside tumour-directed treatment promotes patient-centred care. Systematic assessment and use of patient-reported outcomes and active patient involvement in the decisions about cancer care result in better symptom control, improved physical and mental health, and better use of health-care resources. The absence of international agreements on the content and standards of the organisation, education, and research of palliative care in oncology are major barriers to successful integration. Other barriers include the common misconception that palliative care is end-of-life care only, stigmatisation of death and dying, and insufficient infrastructure and funding. The absence of established priorities might also hinder integration more widely. This Commission proposes the use of standardised care pathways and multidisciplinary teams to promote integration of oncology and palliative care, and calls for changes at the system level to coordinate the activities of professionals, and for the development and implementation of new and improved education programmes, with the overall goal of improving patient care. Integration raises new research questions, all of which contribute to improved clinical care. When and how should palliative care be delivered? What is the optimal model for integrated care? What is the biological and clinical effect of living with advanced cancer for years after diagnosis? Successful integration must challenge the dualistic perspective of either the tumour or the host, and instead focus on a merged approach that places the patient's perspective at the centre. To succeed, integration must be anchored by management and policy makers at all levels of health care, followed by adequate resource allocation, a willingness to prioritise goals and needs, and sustained enthusiasm to help generate support for better integration. This integrated model must be reflected in international and national cancer plans, and be followed by developments of new care models, education and research programmes, all of which should be adapted to the specific cultural contexts within which they are situated. Patient-centred care should be an integrated part of oncology care independent of patient prognosis and treatment intention. To achieve this goal it must be based on changes in professional cultures and priorities in health care

Consideration of depression in oncology : the scenes of research

Ce travail s'est intéresser aux difficultés de la prise en charge de la dépression en explorant plusieurs niveaux de représentations : celui des soignants, des patients, de leur famille. La dépression est une pathologie fréquente en oncologie avec une prévalence d’environ 15% qui augmente avec l'aggravation de la maladie cancéreuse. Elle aggrave les autres symptômes tels que la douleur, la fatigue, l'anxiété et retentit sur la qualité de vie et la survie des patients. La prise en charge spécifique du cancer est plus difficile chez les patients déprimés. Les différents objectifs de cette recherche sont de déterminer les freins de la prise en charge de la pathologie dépressive en oncologie et de sensibiliser les soignants à cette problématique en proposant une réflexion sur les modalités de prise en charge. Après une avoir effectué une revue de la littérature, nous avons débuté un travail de traduction et validation d’une échelle de dépistage de la dépression qui semblait adapté à notre population et aux modalités de prise en charge. Cette échelle a ensuite été proposée et utilisée en routine dans différents lieux de prise en charge. Elle a permis de confirmer les résultats retrouvés dans la littérature internationale quant à la fréquence de la dépression et son association avec d’autres symptômes. Ce travail a été complété par une évaluation de la concordance entre l’évaluation par le patient, le médecin et l’infirmier de la symptomatologie dépressive. Les niveaux de concordance retrouvés étaient faibles. Des résultats similaires ont été retrouvés lorsque l’on s’est intéressé à l’utilisation de différentes méthodes pour évaluer la dépression chez la personne âgée atteinte d’un cancer en phase avancée. Nous avons complété ce travail par une étude rétrospective ayant pour objectif d’évaluer l’impact de l’intervention d’une équipe de soins de support sur la sévérité de la dépression des patients atteints d’un cancer en phase avancée avec des résultats positifs, ainsi qu’une synthèse de la littérature quant aux traitements pharmacologiques existants pour la dépression.La dernière partie a utilisé une autre approche de la dépression avec pour objectif d’évaluer les représentations sociales de la dépression dans plusieurs groupes (soignants et famille de patients. Après une discussion générale de ce travail ainsi que la présentation des limites, nous conclurons par les perspectives quant à la prise en charge de la dépression en oncologie.This work is exploring the associated issues with the management of depression among cancer patients by exploring several levels of representations: health care professionals, patients and patients’ families. Depression is a common disease in oncology with a prevalence of 15%, which increases with the worsening of the cancer disease. It worsens other symptoms such as pain, fatigue, anxiety and impacts patients’ quality of life and survival. Furthermore, cancer specific management is more difficult among depressed patients. The different objectives of this research were to explore the barriers to depression management in oncology and to make health care porfessional aware of this disease by proposing a reflection on the modalities of care.After having conducted a literature review, we started a study to translate and validate a depression screening scale that seemed suited to our population and modalities of care. This scale was then proposed and used routinely in different places of care. Our results were consistent with the international literature regarding the prevalence of depression and its association with other symptoms. We have then explored correlation between depression assessment by the patient, the physician and the nurse. The levels of agreement were found weak. Similar results were found in another study exploring the use of different methods to assess depression in elderly patients with advanced cancer.After these studies, we conducted a retrospective study aiming to evaluate the impact of the intervention of a supportive care team on the severity of depression in advanced cancer patients with positive results and a summary of the existing literature on depression pharmacological treatments.The last part used a different approach to depression study with the goal to assess social representations of depression in several groups (health care professionals, patients and their family). After a general discussion of this work and the presentation of limitations, we conclude with the prospects for the management of depression in oncology

Consensus d'experts sur l'élaboration d'une fiche commune de LATA pour les Services d'Accueil des Urgences de la région Rhône-Alpes (une étude Delphi)

LYON1-BU Santé (693882101) / SudocSudocFranceF

Effet de la réalimentation précoce sur les nausées vomissements postopératoires en anesthésie pédiatrique ambulatoire

LYON1-BU Santé (693882101) / SudocSudocFranceF

Les pratiques des entretiens familles en Unité de Soins Palliatifs en France

La définition des soins palliatifs inclus l'accompagnement des familles. L'entretien famille permet de replacer la famille au centre du projet de soin et du projet décisionnel, ainsi que lui donner un temps de réflexion et un espace d'expression. En France, il n'existe pas de protocole pour la conduite de ces entretiens et il n'existe pas de définition formelle. Le but de notre étude était de décrire les pratiques actuelles des entretiens familles dans toutes les USP de France. Nous avons envoyés 452 questionnaires soit 4 questionnaires par USP, (un pour le médecin référent, un pour un infirmier, un pour l'assistante sociale et un pour la psychologue). Ce questionnaire était constitué de 5 parties (données sociodémographiques ; pratiques actuelles de l'entretien de famille; objectifs principaux des entretiens familles; indications de l'entretien famille; commentaires libres). Nous avons obtenu un taux de réponse de 61%. Nous avons retrouvé des pratiques différentes d'une USP à l'autre, probablement accentuées par l'absence d'une définition commune de l'entretien famille. Notre étude montre qu'il existe une variabilité importante entre les différentes professions (médecins et infirmiers versus psychologues et assistantes sociales) en termes de délai de réalisation des entretiens et d'utilisation d'un protocole pour l'organisation et la conduite de l'entretien. Les objectifs principaux des entretiens sont d'identifier les membres de la famille, d'expliquer les objectifs des soins palliatifs, de permettre à la famille d'exprimer ses émotions, et de discuter du projet de soins. Les principales indications à réaliser des entretiens sont l'existence d'un clivage au sein de l'équipe, une phase palliative terminale, et à la demande de la famille. L'analyse qualitative confirme les différences de pratique, certains soignants regrettent qu'il n'y ait pas de protocole mais beaucoup de commentaires ont été fait sur la difficulté probable d'élaborer un protocole standard. Notre travail retrouve donc des pratiques très différentes d'une USP à l'autre et d'une profession à l'autre. Ces éléments s'accordent avec la littérature existante. Mais il n'existe pas de travaux équivalents ayant exploré les pratiques à l'échelle nationale. Avant les années 1980, il n'existait que peu d'échelles pour évaluer la douleur et celles-ci étaient peu utilisées. L'argument des soignants était que cette évaluation était complexe et ne pouvait passer par l'utilisation d'un outil car chaque douleur est différente et subjective. L'entretien famille génère le même type de réticence chez les soignants. A l'issue de ce travail, nous avons proposé une définition des entretiens familles ainsi qu'un protocole standardisé pour aider à la conduite de ces entretiens. Les prochains travaux devront étudier l'impact d'entretiens familles conduits avec ou sans ce protocole standardisé.NANTES-BU Médecine pharmacie (441092101) / SudocSudocFranceF