The opinions or views expressed in this professional review are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or recommendations of the publisher or the companies that provided grants toward this process. This article is being published with the full knowledge and consent of the authors. This article may discuss pharmaceutical products and/or uses of products that have not been approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration or other regulatory authorities outside of the United States. For approved product information, consult the manufacturer's prescribing information or the applicable regulatory authority. Dosages, indications, and methods of use for compounds that are referred to in this article may be derived from the professional literature or other sources. In vitro and animal data may not correlate with clinical results and do not demonstrate clinical safety or efficacy in humans.We acknowledge the assistance of Lee Ann Chastain in the preparation of this article.

Context The terms “actively dying,” “end of life,” “terminally ill,” “terminal care,” and “transition of care” are commonly used but rarely and inconsistently defined. Objectives We conducted a systematic review to examine the concepts and definitions for these terms. Methods We searched MEDLINE, PsycINFO, Embase, and CINAHL for published peer-reviewed articles from 1948 to 2012 that conceptualized, defined, or examined these terms. Two researchers independently reviewed each citation for inclusion and then extracted the concepts/definitions when available. We also searched 10 dictionaries, four palliative care textbooks, and 13 organization Web sites, including the U.S. Federal Code. Results One of 16, three of 134, three of 44, two of 93, and four of 17 articles defined or conceptualized actively dying, end of life, terminally ill, terminal care, and transition of care, respectively. Actively dying was defined as “hours or days of survival.” We identified two key defining features for end of life, terminally ill, and terminal care: life-limiting disease with irreversible decline and expected survival in terms of months or less. Transition of care was discussed in relation to changes in 1) place of care (e.g., hospital to home), 2) level of professions providing the care (e.g., acute care to hospice), and 3) goals of care (e.g., curative to palliative). Definitions for these five terms were rarely found in dictionaries, textbooks, and organizational Web sites. However, when available, the definitions were generally consistent with the concepts discussed previously. Conclusion We identified unifying concepts for five commonly used terms in palliative care and developed a preliminary conceptual framework toward building standardized definitions.

Purpose Commonly used terms such as “supportive care,” “best supportive care,” “palliative care,” and “hospice care” were rarely and inconsistently defined in the palliative oncology literature. We conducted a systematic review of the literature to further identify concepts and definitions for these terms. Methods We searched MEDLINE, PsycInfo, EMBASE, and CINAHL for published peer-reviewed articles from 1948 to 2011 that conceptualized, defined, or examined these terms. Two researchers independently reviewed each citation for inclusion and then extracted the concepts/definitions when available. Dictionaries/textbooks were also searched. Results Nine of 32 “SC/BSC,” 25 of 182 “PC,” and 12 of 42 “HC” articles focused on providing a conceptual framework/definition. Common concepts for all three terms were symptom control and quality-of-life for patients with life-limiting illness. “SC” focused more on patients on active treatment compared to other categories (9/9 vs. 8/37) and less often involved interdisciplinary care (4/9 vs. 31/37). In contrast, “HC” focused more on volunteers (6/12 vs. 6/34), bereavement care (9/12 vs. 7/34), and community care (9/12 vs. 6/34). Both “PC” and “SC/BSC” were applicable earlier in the disease trajectory (16/34 vs. 0/9). We found 13, 24, and 17 different definitions for “SC/BSC,” “PC,” and “HC,” respectively. “SC/BSC” was the most variably defined, ranging from symptom management during cancer therapy to survivorship care. Dictionaries/textbooks showed similar findings. Conclusion We identified defining concepts for “SC/BSC,” “PC,” and “HC” and developed a preliminary conceptual framework unifying these terms along the continuum of care to help build consensus toward standardized definitions.

Members of the Mucositis Study Group of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer/International Society of Oral Oncology (MASCC/ISOO) recently completed the process of updating the MASCC/ISOO Clinical Practice Guidelines for the prevention and treatment of mucositis. These guidelines, originally published in 2004, and last updated in 2007, provide clinicians with objective, evidence-based recommendations for the management of mucositis secondary to cancer therapy. This brief paper describes the methodology used to conduct the most recent systematic review in 2011, and develop new guidelines, providing the basis for the update. The overriding aims of the process were to assess evidence of effectiveness of interventions for the prevention and treatment of mucositis and to produce clinical practice guidelines for the management of mucositis using best available evidence.