The authors declare that they have no competing interests.
CS designed the study, analysed the data and wrote the manuscript. DS, KF and AS analysed the data and wrote the manuscript. KF performed the statistical analysis. CA and MS analysed the data. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
CS is a Consultant in Psychosomatic Medicine, Psychotherapy and Palliative Medicine and Deputy Medical Chief at the Interdisciplinary Centre for Palliative Medicine at the University Hospital Düsseldorf, Germany. He is co-speaker of the working group on the dying phase at the German Association for Palliative Medicine.
End-of-life integrated care plans are used as structuring tools for the care of the dying. A widely adopted example is the Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient (LCP). Recently, several concerns were raised about LCP care, such as a worry that diagnosis of dying might be leading to a self-fulfilling trajectory, including hastening of death. However, data on rates of discontinuation of LCP care are lacking. In an observational study, we therefore investigated the incidence, features and trajectory of patients who were discontinued from the LCP. We hypothesised that (1) it is common to discontinue patients from the LCP, (2) quality of life does not decrease for discontinued LCP patients, and (3) discontinued patients live longer than patients who remain within LCP care.
All adult patients who were diagnosed as dying in a German university hospital specialized palliative care unit were included in 2013 and 2014. Actuarial estimation of survival prognostication tools and a number of quality of life indicators were used for data collection. Survival time was analysed using Kaplan-Meier estimates. Group differences in quality of life were tested using multivariate analysis of variance.
159 patients were included in a digital version of the LCP. 15 patients (9.4 %) were discontinued later. Quality of life did not decrease for discontinued patients during LCP care (p = 0.16). LCP discontinued patients lived significantly longer than the remaining LCP subgroup (difference of means 296 hours, 95 % confidence interval 105.5 to 451.5 hours; difference of survival function estimates p < 0.0001).
When patients are diagnosed as dying, death is not the inevitable outcome of an end-of-life integrated care plan such as the LCP. Instead, it is common to discontinue the LCP care. Regular careful interprofessional assessments are important for identifying those patients who need to be discontinued from their end-of-life care plan. In this study, we found no evidence for harm by the LCP. We conclude that a correctly applied integrated care plan can be useful to provide good and safe care for the dying.
Internal Clinical Trial Register of the Medical Faculty, Heinrich Heine University Düsseldorf, No. 2015053680 (22 May 2015).
Smeding R, Bolger M, Ellershaw J. International development of the Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient (LCP). In: Ellershaw J, Wilkinson S, editors. Care of the dying: a pathway to excellence. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011. p. 189–205.
Ellershaw J, Murphy D. What is the Liverpool Care Pathway of the Dying Patient (LCP)? In: Ellershaw J, Wilkinson S, editors. Care of the dying: a pathway to excellence. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011. p. 15–31.
Thorns A, Garrard E. Ethical issues in care of the dying. In: Ellershaw J, Wilkinson S, editors. Care of the dying: a pathway to excellence. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011. p. 63–84.
Vanhaecht K, Panella M, Van Zelm R, Sermeus W. What about care pathways? In: Ellershaw J, Wilkinson S, editors. Care of the dying: a pathway to excellence. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011. p. 1–14.
Wilkinson AM, Johnson CE, Walker H, Colgan V, Arnet H, Rai T. Evaluating the Liverpool Care Pathway for care of the terminally ill in rural Australia. Support Cancer Care. 2015; doi: 10.1007/s00520-015-2697-6.
Raijmakers JHN, Van Zuylen L, Furst CJ, Beccaro M, Maiorana L, Pilastri P, et al. Variation in medication use in cancer patients at the end of life: a cross-sectional analysis. Support Cancer Care. 2013;21:1003–11. CrossRef
WHO Study group on interprofessional education and collaborative practice. Framework for action on interprofessional education & collaborative practice. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2010. http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/70185/1/WHO_HRH_HPN_10.3_eng.pdf?ua=1. Accessed 4 Aug 2015.
Ellershaw J, Fürst CJ, Lunder U, Boughey M, Eychmüller S, Hannam Hodgson SH, et al. Care of the dying and the LCP in England: an international perspective. Eur J Palliat Care. 2013;20:120–3.
Gambles M, Roberts A, Doyle R. Introduction and implementation of the Liverpool Care Pathway for the Dying Patient. In: Ellershaw J, Wilkinson S, editors. Care of the dying: a pathway to excellence. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011. p. 157–72.
Neuberger J, Guthrie C, Aaronovitch D, Hameed K, Bonser T, Harries of Pentregarth R, et al. More care, less pathway. A review of the Liverpool Care Pathway. Department of Health (UK), 2013. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/212450/Liverpool_Care_Pathway.pdf. Accessed 13 Feb 2015.
Leadership Alliance for the Care of Dying People. Once chance to get it right: improving people’s experience of care in the last few days and hours of life. Department of Health (UK). 2014. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/323188/One_chance_to_get_it_right.pdf. Accessed 18 Feb 2015.
Regnard C. The demise of the Liverpool Care Pathway: should we ban the highway code because of bad drivers? Age Aging. 2014;43:171–3. CrossRef
Parry R, Seymour J, Whittaker B, Bird L, Cox K. Rapid evidence review: pathways focused on the dying phase in end of life care and their key components. Sue Ryder Care Centre for the Study of Supportive, Palliative and End of Life Care, Nottingham, United Kingdom, 2013. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/212451/review_academic_literature_on_end_of_life.pdf. Assessed 4 Aug 2015.
Von Elm E, Altman DG, Egger M, Pocock SJ, Gøtzsche PC, Vandenbroucke JP. The strengthening the reporting of observational studies in epidemiology (STROBE) statement: guidelines for reporting observational studies. J Clin Epidemiol. 2008;61:344–9. CrossRef
Glare P, Sinclair C, Downing M, Stone P, Maltoni M, Vigano A. Predicting survival in patients with advanced disease. Eur J Cancer. 2008;44:1046–156. CrossRef
Jonen-Thielemann I. Sterbephasen in der Palliativmedizin. In: Aulbert E, Nauck F, Radbruch L, editors. Lehrbuch der Palliativmedizin. 2nd ed. Stuttgart: Schattauer; 2006. p. 1019–28.
Karnofsky DA, Abelmann WH, Craver LF, Burchenal JH. The use of nitrogen mustards in the palliative treatment of cancer. Cancer. 1948;1:634–56. CrossRef
Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional evaluation: the Barthel index. Md State Med J. 1965;14:61–5. PubMed
Krohwinkel M. Der Pflegeprozeß am Beispiel von Apoplexiekranken. Eine Studie zur Erfassung und Entwicklung ganzheitlich-rehabilitierender Prozeßpflege. Schriftenreihe des Bundesministeriums für Gesundheit, vol. 16. Nomos: Baden-Baden; 1993.
Ellershaw J, Wilkinson S, editors. Care of the dying: a pathway to excellence. 2nd ed. Oxford: Oxford University Press; 2011.
Dein S, George R. The time to die: symbolic factors relating to the time of death. Mortality. 2001;6:203–11.
Eychmüller S, Domeisen Benedetti F, Latten R, Tal K, Walker J, Costantini M. ‘Diagnosing dying’ in cancer patients – a systematic literature review. Eur J Palliat Care. 2013;20:292–5.
Lund S, Richardson A, May C. Barriers to advance care planning at the end of life: an explanatory systematic review of implementation studies. PLoS One. 2015;295(10):e0116629. CrossRef
- The characteristics of patients who discontinue their dying process – an observational study at a single university hospital centre
- BioMed Central
Neu im Fachgebiet AINS
Meistgelesene Bücher aus dem Fachgebiet AINS
Mail Icon II