Background:Integrated palliative care aims at improving coordination of palliative care services around patients’ anticipated needs. However, international comparisons of how integrated palliative care is implemented across four key domains of integrated care (content of care, patient flow, information logistics and availability of (human) resources and material) are lacking.Aim:To examine how integrated palliative care takes shape in practice across abovementioned key domains within several integrated palliative care initiatives in Europe.Design:Qualitative group interview design.Setting/participants:A total of 19 group interviews were conducted (2 in Belgium, 4 in the Netherlands, 4 in the United Kingdom, 4 in Germany and 5 in Hungary) with 142 healthcare professionals from several integrated palliative care initiatives in five European countries. The majority were nurses (n = 66; 46%) and physicians (n = 50; 35%).Results:The dominant strategy for fostering integrated palliative care is building core teams of palliative care specialists and extended professional networks based on personal relationships, shared norms, values and mutual trust, rather than developing standardised information exchange and referral pathways. Providing integrated palliative care with healthcare professionals in the wider professional community appears difficult, as a shared proactive multidisciplinary palliative care approach is lacking, and healthcare professionals often do not know palliative care professionals or services.Conclusion:Achieving better palliative care integration into regular healthcare and convincing the wider professional community is a difficult task that will take time and effort. Enhancing standardisation of palliative care into education, referral pathways and guidelines and standardised information exchange may be necessary. External authority (policy makers, insurance companies and professional bodies) may be needed to support integrated palliative care practices across settings.

Background: The central goal of palliative care is to optimize the quality of life of patients suffering from life-limiting illnesses, which includes psychosocial and spiritual wellbeing. Research has demonstrated positive correlations between humor and laughter with life satisfaction and other aspects of wellbeing, and physiological symptoms can be improved by humorous stimuli.Objectives: The aim of this review is to evaluate humor interventions and assessments that have been applied in palliative care and to derive implications for future research.Methods: A systematic review of four databases identified 13 included studies. Criteria for inclusion were peer-reviewed English-language studies on humor interventions or assessments in a palliative care context.Results: Two studies on humor interventions and 11 studies on humor assessment were included in the systematic review. Most of these studies were about the patients' perspective on humor in palliative care. Findings showed that humor had a positive effect on patients, their relatives, and professional caregivers. Humor was widely perceived as appropriate and seen as beneficial to care in all studies.Conclusions: Even though humor interventions seem to be potentially useful in palliative care, descriptions evaluating their use are scarce. Overall, research on humor assessment and interventions in palliative care has remained limited in terms of quantity and quality. More research activities are needed to build a solid empirical foundation for implementing humor and laughter as part of regular palliative care activities.

Background:Although examining perspectives of patients on integrated palliative care organisation is essential, available literature is largely based on administrative data or healthcare professionals’ perspectives.Aim:(1) Providing insight into the composition and quality of care networks of patients receiving palliative care and (2) describing perceived integration between healthcare professionals within these networks and its association with overall satisfaction.Design:Cross-sectional explorative design.Setting/participants:We recruited 157 patients (62% cancer, 25% chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, 13% chronic heart failure, mean age 68 years, 55% female) from 23 integrated palliative care initiatives in Belgium, Germany, the United Kingdom, Hungary and the Netherlands.Results:About 33% reported contact with a palliative care specialist and 48% with a palliative care nurse. Relationships with palliative care specialists were rated significantly higher than other physicians (p < 0.001). Compared to patients with cancer, patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (odds ratio = 0.16, confidence interval (0.04; 0.57)) and chronic heart failure (odds ratio = 0.11, confidence interval (0.01; 0.93)) had significantly lower odds of reporting contact with palliative care specialists and patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (odds ratio = 0.23, confidence interval (0.08; 0.71)) had significantly lower odds of reporting contact with palliative care nurses. Perceptions of main responsible healthcare professionals or caregivers in patient’s care networks varied across countries. Perceived integration was significantly associated with overall satisfaction.Conclusion:Palliative care professionals are not always present or recognised as such in patients’ care networks. Expert palliative care involvement needs to be explicated especially for non-cancer patients. One healthcare professional should support patients in understanding and navigating their palliative care network. Patients seem satisfied with care provision as long as continuity of care is provided.

The challenges identified during outcomes of the workshops were used as the basis for subsequent dissemination and implementation activities in the ATOME project, and in some countries the workshop proceedings already served as a stepping-stone for the first changes in regulations and legislation.

Shifting of traditional tasks from GPs to PCTs influences the role of the GP. PCTs can unburden the GP from unrealistic expectations and improve the patients' quality of life. However, this leads to a tendency for reduced importance of the GP.