Context. Demoralization is a state of existential distress in patients with advanced illness, typically with coping difficulties, feelings of loss of sense, and purpose in life and despair, among other things. The New Demoralization Scale (DS-II) is an evaluation tool for this syndrome, which has recently been reformulated on a shorter scale.Objectives. The objective of this study was to obtain a Spanish version of the DS-II and to assess its psychometric properties in advanced cancer patients in Spain and a number of Latin American countries.Methods. Following a translationeback translation process, a validation study and a confirmatory analysis using structural equation models with their corresponding latent constructs were undertaken. Patients completed the DS-II in Spanish (DS-II (es)), the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, and the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Systemerevised. Reliability was studied according to internal consistency; construct validity and concurrent validity with the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale and the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Systemerevised; discriminant validity using the Karnofsky Performance Status scale; and feasibility, with response ratio and required time. Cutoff points were established, and sensitivity and specificity were studied.Results. The DS-II (es) was obtained. One hundred fifty patients completed the validation study. The confirmatory analysis showed coherence, and all items correlated positively with their subscales and with the overall scale. Cronbach's alpha for the DS-II (es) was 0.88, for the sense and purpose subscale 0.83, and for the coping ability 0.79. Demoralization correlated significantly with emotional distress (rho ¼ 0.73, P < 0.001). The tool distinguished between patients with diverse functional levels (rho ¼ À0.319, P ¼ 0.001). Cutoff points at 10 and 20 out of 32 were established. The scale showed high sensitivity (81.97%) and specificity (80.90%). The prevalence of demoralization was 33% in our sample.Conclusion. The Spanish version of the new Kissane DS-II demoralization scale has shown to be valid, reliable, and feasible with adequate psychometric properties.

Referral to PC from the EC led to earlier delivery of PC with subsequent earlier control of symptoms. EC patients who received PC consultations and were hospitalized had shorter hospitalizations than PC referral in the inpatient area. More research is needed to describe the impact of PC services on symptom assessment and management and on goals and plan of care in patients with advanced illness admitted to the EC.

From research studies, there is only indirect evidence that palliative care training at university leads to better clinical care of patients. In the future, long-term cohort or controlled studies might answer that question.

The study found that a patient's perception of a physician's compassion did not change after reading a vignette describing a negative clinical outcome, regardless of whether the physician had given a more or a less optimistic message to the patient. However, the results suggested that patients perceived worse professionalism and overall physician impression scores for both more and less optimistic physicians and lower likelihood to choose the more optimistic physician for themselves and their family.

ObjectiveMeeting the preferences of patients is considered an important palliative care outcome. Prior studies reported that more than 80% of patients with terminally ill cancer prefer to die at home. The purpose of this study was to determine place-of-death preference among palliative care patients in the outpatient centre and the palliative care unit (PCU) of a comprehensive cancer centre.MethodsA cross-sectional anonymous questionnaire was administered to patients with advanced cancer and caregivers (PCU and outpatient centre) between August 2012 and September 2014. PCU patients responded when there was no delirium and the primary caregiver responded when the patient was unable to respond. In the case of outpatients, dyads were assessed. The survey was repeated 1 month later.ResultsOverall, 65% preferred home death. There was less preference for home death among PCU patients (58%) than among outpatients (72%). Patient and caregiver agreement regarding preferred place of death for home was 86%. After 1 month, outpatients were significantly more likely than PCU patients to have the same preferred place of death as they had 1 month earlier (96% vs 83%; p=0.003).ConclusionsAlthough home was the preferred place of death in our group of patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers, a substantial minority preferred hospital death or had no preference. We speculate that PCU patients’ higher preference for hospital death is likely related to more severe distress because they had already tried home care. Personalised assessment of place of death preference for both patient and caregiver is needed.