Talk to the Veterans Crisis Line now
U.S. flag
An official website of the United States government
Veterans Benefits and Health Care About VA Find a VA Location

VA Health Systems Research

Go to the VA ORD website
Go to the QUERI website

HSR&D Citation Abstract

Search | Search by Center | Search by Source | Keywords in Title

A Systematic Review in Support of the National Consensus Project Clinical Practice Guidelines for Quality Palliative Care, Fourth Edition.

Ahluwalia SC, Chen C, Raaen L, Motala A, Walling AM, Chamberlin M, O'Hanlon C, Larkin J, Lorenz K, Akinniranye O, Hempel S. A Systematic Review in Support of the National Consensus Project Clinical Practice Guidelines for Quality Palliative Care, Fourth Edition. Journal of pain and symptom management. 2018 Dec 1; 56(6):831-870.

Dimensions for VA is a web-based tool available to VA staff that enables detailed searches of published research and research projects.

If you have VA-Intranet access, click here for more information vaww.hsrd.research.va.gov/dimensions/

VA staff not currently on the VA network can access Dimensions by registering for an account using their VA email address.    Search Dimensions for VA for this citation
* Don't have VA-internal network access or a VA email address? Try searching the free-to-the-public version of Dimensions


Abstract:

CONTEXT: Palliative care continues to be a rapidly growing field aimed at improving quality of life for patients and their caregivers. OBJECTIVES: The purpose of this review was to provide a synthesis of the evidence in palliative care to inform the fourth edition of the National Consensus Project Clinical Practice Guidelines for Quality Palliative Care. METHODS: Ten key review questions addressing eight content domains guided a systematic review focused on palliative care interventions. We searched eight databases in February 2018 for systematic reviews published in English from 2013, after the last edition of National Consensus Project guidelines was published, to present. Experienced literature reviewers screened, abstracted, and appraised data per a detailed protocol registered in PROSPERO. The quality of evidence was evaluated using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluations criteria. The review was supported by a technical expert panel. RESULTS: We identified 139 systematic reviews meeting inclusion criteria. Reviews addressed the structure and process of care (interdisciplinary team care, 13 reviews; care coordination, 18 reviews); physical aspects (48 reviews); psychological aspects (26 reviews); social aspects (two reviews); spiritual, religious, and existential aspects (11 reviews); cultural aspects (three reviews); care of the patient nearing the end of life (grief/bereavement programs, six reviews; final days of life, two reviews); ethical and legal aspects (36 reviews). CONCLUSION: A substantial body of evidence exists to support clinical practice guidelines for quality palliative care, but the quality of evidence is limited.




Questions about the HSR website? Email the Web Team

Any health information on this website is strictly for informational purposes and is not intended as medical advice. It should not be used to diagnose or treat any condition.