For more than 30 years, the term "palliative care" has been used. From the outset, the term has undergone a series of transformations in its definitions and consequently in its tasks and goals. There remains a lack of consensus on a definition. The aim of this article is to analyse the definitions of palliative care in the specialist literature and to identify the key elements of palliative care using discourse analysis: a qualitative methodology. The literature search focused on definitions of the term 'palliative medicine' and 'palliative care' in the World Wide Web and medical reference books in English and German. A total of 37 English and 26 German definitions were identified and analysed. Our study confirmed the lack of a consistent meaning concerning the investigated terms, reflecting on-going discussion about the nature of the field among palliative care practitioners. Several common key elements were identified. Four main categories emerged from the discourse analysis of the definition of palliative care: target groups, structure, tasks and expertise. In addition, the theoretical principles and goals of palliative care were discussed and found to be key elements, with relief and prevention of suffering and improvement of quality of life as main goals. The identified key elements can contribute to the definition of the concept 'palliative care'. Our study confirms the importance of semantic and ethical influences on palliative care that should be considered in future research on semantics in different languages.

Fatigue is one of the most frequent symptoms in palliative care patients, reported in .80% of cancer patients and in up to 99% of patients following radio- or chemotherapy. Fatigue also plays a major role in palliative care for noncancer patients, with large percentages of patients with HIV, multiple sclerosis, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease or heart failure reporting fatigue. This paper presents the position of an expert working group of the European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC), evaluating the available evidence on diagnosis and treatment of fatigue in palliative care patients and providing the basis for future discussions. As the expert group feels that culture and language influence the approach to fatigue in different European countries, a focus was on cultural issues in the assessment and treatment of fatigue in palliative care. As a working definition, fatigue was defined as a subjective feeling of tiredness, weakness or lack of energy. Qualitative differences between fatigue in cancer patients and in healthy controls have been proposed, but these differences seem to be only an expression of the overwhelming intensity of cancer-related fatigue. The pathophysiology of fatigue in palliative care patients is not fully understood. For a systematic approach, primary fatigue, most probably related to high load of proinflammatory cytokines and secondary fatigue from concurrent syndromes and comorbidities may be differentiated. Fatigue is generally recognized as a multidimensional construct, with a physical and cognitive dimension acknowledged by all authors. As fatigue is an inherent word only in the English and French language, but not in other European languages, screening for fatigue should include questions on weakness as a paraphrase for the physical dimension and on tiredness as a paraphrase for the cognitive dimension. Treatment of fatigue should include causal interventions for secondary fatigue and symptomatic treatment with pharmacological and nonpharmacological interventions. Strong evidence has been accumulated that aerobic exercise will reduce fatigue levels in cancer survivors and patients receiving cancer treatment. In the final stage of life, fatigue may provide protection and shielding from suffering for the patient and thus treatment may be detrimental. Identification of the time point, where treatment of fatigue is no longer indicated is important to alleviate distress at the end of life.

Constipation is one of the most common problems in patients receiving palliative care and can cause extreme suffering and discomfort. The aims of this study are to raise awareness of constipation in palliative care, provide clear, practical guidance on management and encourage further research in the area. A pan-European working group of physicians and nurses with significant experience in the management of constipation in palliative care met to evaluate the published evidence and produce these clinical practice recommendations. Four potentially relevant publications were identified, highlighting a lack of clear, practical guidance on the assessment, diagnosis and management of constipation in palliative care patients. Given the limited data available, our recommendations are based on expert clinical opinion, relevant research findings from other settings and best practice from the countries represented. Palliative care patients are at a high risk of constipation, and while general principles of prevention should be followed, pharmacological treatment is often necessary. The combination of a softener and stimulant laxative is generally recommended, and the choice of laxatives should be made on an individual basis. The current evidence base is poor and further research is required on many aspects of the assessment, diagnosis and management of constipation in palliative care.

In a new team, close communication is particularly important for staff as they reorientate themselves to the dynamics of a new peer group. The results confirm the overwhelming importance of clarity, commitment and close, positive exchange among team members for successful team work.

Sedation and tiredness are among the most frequent symptoms among cancer patients. A detailed assessment of these symptoms is necessary to evaluate therapeutic effects, such as the use of methylphenidate or comparison of different opioids. The Brief Fatigue Inventory (BFI) has been validated as a short and comprehensive instrument to assess severity of fatigue and fatigue-related impairment in cancer patients. We validated the German version of the BFI in patients with chronic cancer-related and noncancer-related pain treated in a tertiary pain center. Patients treated in the Pain Clinic of the Department of Anesthesiology completed the BFI, the minimal documentation system (MIDOS) and the short form SF-36 quality-of-life questionnaire (SF-36). Test-retest reliability was assessed with a second BFI immediately after the consultation and in a subgroup of patients after 3 to 7 days. Nineteen percent of the 117 patients were treated for cancer-related pain (C); the other patients suffered from chronic severe pain of nonmalignant origin (NC). Patients reported mean values for average fatigue of 3.9 (C) and 4.9 (NC), and for worst fatigue of 5.5 (C) and 6.2 (NC). The mean score of the 6 impairment items was 4.3 in both groups. Factor analysis led to a solution with one common factor for all nine items. Fatigue on the BFI correlated highly with 'feeling tired' in the SF-36 and with 'sedation' in MIDOS, and less with 'being worn out' in SF-36 and 'weakness' in MIDOS. Internal consistency was high, as was test-retest reliability, with a correlation of the intensity, mean scores of 0.93 and the impairment mean scores of 0.87. In conclusion, we found the German version of the BFI to be reliable and valid for cancer and noncancer patients. Minor differences were seen in the validation compared to the original version.