Preferences of quality delivery of palliative care among cancer patients in low- and middle-income countries: A review

Prevalence of Preferences for End-of-Life Place of Care and Death Among Patients With Cancer in Low- and Middle-Income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

PURPOSE

There is limited information on preferences for place of care and death among patients with cancer in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). The aim was to report the prevalence and determinants of preferences for end-of-life place of care and death among patients with cancer in LMICs and identify concordance between the preferred and actual place of death.

METHODS

Systematic review and meta-analysis guided by Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses was conducted. Four electronic databases were searched to identify studies of any design that reported on the preferred and actual place of care and death of patients with cancer in LMICs. A random-effects meta-analysis estimated pooled prevalences, with 95% CI, with subgroup analyses for region and risk of bias.

RESULTS

Thirteen studies were included. Of 3,837 patients with cancer, 62% (95% CI, 49 to 75) preferred to die at home; however, the prevalence of actual home death was 37% (95% CI, 13 to 60). Subgroup analyses found that preferences for home as place of death varied from 55% (95% CI, 41 to 69) for Asia to 64% (95% CI, 57 to 71) for South America and 72% (95% CI, 48 to 97) for Africa. The concordance between the preferred and actual place of death was 48% (95% CI, 41 to 55) for South Africa and 92% (95% CI, 88 to 95) for Malaysia. Factors associated with an increased likelihood of preferred home death included performance status and patients with breast cancer.

CONCLUSION

There is very little literature from LMICs on the preferences for end-of-life place of care and death among patients with cancer. Rigorous research is needed to help understand how preferences of patients with cancer change during their journey through cancer.

Analyzing the composition of the editorial boards in high-impact medical ethics journals: a survey study

BACKGROUND

The underrepresentation of scholarly works from low- and middle-income countries (LMICs) in academic literature is a documented concern, attributed partly to editorial biases. This trend, prevalent across various disciplines, has been less explored in the context of medical ethics journals. This study aimed to examine the composition of editorial board members (EBM) in high-impact medical ethics journals and to evaluate the extent of international diversity within these editorial teams.

METHODS

This study incorporated an analysis of 16 high-impact medical ethics journals. Information regarding the EBM of these journals was systematically gathered and categorized based on the World Bank's country income classifications. An in-depth examination of the editorial board compositions was then conducted.

RESULTS

The study identified 669 EBM across the selected journals. A predominant 89.84% (601) of these members were from high-income countries (HICs), with upper-middle-income countries contributing 7.47% (50) and lower-middle-income countries 2.69% (18). No EBM were associated with low-income countries. A regional breakdown indicated that North America was the most represented area, accounting for 48.88% (327), followed by Europe & Central Asia (27.50%, 184), East Asia & Pacific (13.45%, 90), Latin America & Caribbean (4.63%, 31), Sub-Saharan Africa (4.19%, 28), Middle East & North Africa (0.75%, 5), and South Asia (0.60%, 4). In total, these EBMs hailed from 46 different countries, with the United States representing the largest proportion (43.80%, 293), followed by the United Kingdom (13.15%, 88), Australia (7.92%, 53), Germany (6.73%, 45), and Canada (5.08%, 34).

CONCLUSIONS

There is a significant lack of international representation within the EBM of high-impact medical ethics journals. The majority of editors in this field are affiliated with HICs, leading to a severe underrepresentation of LMICs within the editorial boards.

Strategies for knowledge translation of a palliative approach outside specialized palliative care services: a scoping review

Objectives

Research suggests palliative care to be translated and integrated in non-specialized palliative care services throughout the palliative care continuum across populations and settings. A need has been identified to build on the existing research literature in order to design strong knowledge translation strategies that can be evaluated in future research. The aim was to map strategies for knowledge translation of a palliative approach to care into non-specialized palliative care services for adult patients. The objectives were to explore the primary research activities, the specific type of knowledge translation strategies used, the research designs and study settings for such evaluations along with the major results thereof, and to identify major research gaps in this area.

Methods

A scoping review was performed to map the volume and characteristics of research literature (project registered in PROSPERO #2018 CRD42018100663). The ten-year period 2010 to 2019 was searched in six major databases for original articles published in English in which the knowledge translation of a palliative approach for adult patients was evaluated in non-specialized palliative healthcare settings, and all type of empirical data-based research designs. We excluded non-English, non-empirical articles, non-evaluation of knowledge translations, specialized palliative care settings, and other types of publications (i.e. non-original articles).

Results

Most of the 183 included articles focused on patients with cancer who were dying in hospitals and in high income countries. Only 13 articles focused on early palliative care. A palette of different strategies was used to implement palliative care in non-specialist palliative settings; no strategy was identified as outstanding. The majority of the articles had unspecified essential components of the research designs.

Conclusion

Previous suggestions for utilization of implementation science for knowledge translation of a palliative approach to care into non-specialized palliative care services are confirmed, and established knowledge translation theories can strengthen the field. To advance this specific field of knowledge, meticulously detailed reporting of studies is required as related to research designs, clarifications of contextual influences and mechanisms at work. Specific systematic reviews and meta-syntheses in the field are merited.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12904-022-00929-0.