Development of palliative care educational programmes continues in Japan. An instrument to evaluate a wider range of palliative care knowledge among general physicians and nurses is needed. However, such an instrument does not currently exist. The aim of this study was to develop an assessment to measure the efficacy of palliative care educational programmes. The questionnaire survey was validated with a group of 940 nurses at two facilities. The response rate was 85 % (n = 797). This study used psychometric methods such as item response theory and intraclass correlation coefficients. Ultimately, 20 items in 5 domains including 'philosophy', 'pain', 'dyspnoea', 'psychiatric problems' and 'gastrointestinal problems' were selected. For these items, the intraclass correlation was 0.88 overall and 0.61-0.82 in each domain; the Kuder-Richardson formula 20 in internal consistency was 0.81. Validity and reliability of the instrument were established. This tool is designed to evaluate a wider range of palliative care knowledge than currently available assessments and can be used for general physicians and nurses. The evaluation of educational programmes and the clarification of actual knowledge acquired are possible using this instrument.

Knowledge, difficulty and self-reported practice for symptom management, particularly psychological symptoms, were insufficient, particularly in community hospitals. Education, expert support and adequate clinical experiences would help provide quality palliative care.

The validity and reliability of these scales were established. Therefore, the clarification of actual practices used and difficulties experienced will be possible using these scales.

This study showed that the PCCT performed comprehensive assessments on referred patients and provided extra support. No patient's QOL 1 week after referral was improved with the exception of insomnia. Referring staff highly evaluated the activities of the PCCT. In the evaluation of PCCTs, further research about the variation of clinical activities of PCCTs, their applicability, and benefit is needed.

Purpose Discrepancies exist between healthcare provider and patient perceptions surrounding breast cancer treatment. Significant treatment changes in the last 10 years have made re-evaluation of these perceptions necessary. Methods Physicians and nurses involved in breast cancer treatment, and patients who had received breast cancer chemotherapy (past 5 years), were questioned using an Internet survey. Participants ranked physical concerns (treatment side effects), psychological concerns, priorities for treatment selection, and side effects to be avoided during treatment. Patients were asked about desired treatment information/information sources. Rankings were calculated using the mean value of scores. Spearman's rank correlation was used to determine the concordance of rankings among groups. Results Survey respondents included 207 patients, 185 physicians, and 150 nurses. Patients and nurses similarly ranked distressing physical concerns; physician rankings differed. Quality of life (QoL) and treatment response ranked high with physicians and patients when considering future treatment; nurses prioritized QoL. All three groups generally agreed on ranking of psychological concerns experienced during chemotherapy, explanation of treatment options, and how treatment decisions were made, although more patients thought treatment decisions should be made independently. Healthcare providers reported providing explanations of treatment side effects and information on physical/psychological support options while patients felt both were lacking. Concordance was calculated as 0.47 (patient-physician), 0.83 (patient-nurse), and 0.76 (physician-nurse). Patients desired additional information, preferring healthcare providers as the source. Conclusions Specific areas for improvement in breast cancer patient care were identified; programs should be implemented to address unmet needs and improve treatment in these areas.