Frameworks are the conceptual underpinnings of the study. Both conceptual and theoretical frameworks are often used in palliative and end-of-life care studies to help with study design, guide, and conduct investigations. While an increasing number of investigators have included frameworks in their study, to date, there has not been a comprehensive review of frameworks that were utilized in palliative and end-of-life care research studies.
Aim:
To summarize conceptual and theoretical frameworks used in palliative and end-of-life care research studies. And to synthesize which of eight domains from the National Consensus Project’s Clinical Practice Guidelines for Quality Palliative Care (fourth edition) each framework belongs to.
Design:
Systematic review.
Data sources:
Four electronic databases (EMBASE, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health, PsychINFO, and PubMed) were searched from July 2010 to September 2021.
Results:
A total 2231 citations were retrieved, of which 44 articles met eligibility. Across primary studies, 33,801 study participants were captured. Twenty-six investigators (59.1%) proposed previously unpublished frameworks. In 10 studies, investigators modified existing frameworks, mainly to overcome inherent limitations. In eight studies, investigators utilized existing frameworks referenced in previously published studies. There were eight orientations identified among 44 frameworks we reviewed (e.g. system, patient, patient-doctor).
Conclusions:
We examined palliative and end-of-life research studies to identify and characterize conceptual or theoretical frameworks proposed or utilized. Of 44 frameworks we reviewed, 21 studies (47.7%) were aligned with a Clinical Practice Guideline’s single domain, while the rest two or more of eight guidelines in quality palliative care domains.
BeeleyLJWinfieldSAdamsD. Making the most of a palliative care experience. BMJ2020; 368: l6893.
2.
ComptonC. Palliative care, hospice, and end of life. In: ComptonC (ed.) Cancer: the enemy from within: a comprehensive textbook of cancer’s causes, complexities and consequences. Cham: Springer International Publishing, 2020, pp.259–267.
3.
PirlWFTemelJSBillingsA, et al. Depression after diagnosis of advanced non-small cell lung cancer and survival: a pilot study. Psychosomatics2008; 49(3): 218–224.
4.
HensonLAMaddocksMEvansC, et al. Palliative care and the management of common distressing symptoms in advanced cancer: pain, breathlessness, nausea and vomiting, and fatigue. J Clin Oncol2020; 38(9): 905–914.
5.
YatesP. Symptom management and palliative care for patients with cancer. Nurs Clin2017; 52(1): 179–191.
6.
TemelJSGreerJAMuzikanskyA, et al. Early palliative care for patients with metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer. New Engl J Med2010; 363(8): 733–742.
7.
BrumleyREnguidanosSJamisonP, et al. Increased satisfaction with care and lower costs: results of a randomized trial of in-home palliative care. J Am Geriatr Soc2007; 55(7): 993–1000.
8.
AspinalFAddington-HallJHughesR, et al. Using satisfaction to measure the quality of palliative care: a review of the literature. J Adv Nurs2003; 42(4): 324–339.
9.
SansóNGalianaLOliverA, et al. Palliative care professionals’ inner life: exploring the relationships among awareness, self-care, and compassion satisfaction and fatigue, burnout, and coping with death. J Pain Symptom Manag2015; 50(2): 200–207.
10.
GomesBCalanzaniNCurialeV, et al. Effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of home palliative care services for adults with advanced illness and their caregivers. Cochrane Database Syst Rev2013; 2013(6): Cd007760.
11.
ReidEAKovalerchikOJubanyikK, et al. Is palliative care cost-effective in low-income and middle-income countries? A mixed-methods systematic review. BMJ Support Palliat Care2019; 9(2): 120–129.
12.
MaionePPerroneFGalloC, et al. Pretreatment quality of life and functional status assessment significantly predict survival of elderly patients with advanced non—small-cell lung cancer receiving chemotherapy: a prognostic analysis of the multicenter Italian lung cancer in the elderly study. J Clin Oncol2005; 23(28): 6865–6872.
13.
RaghupathiWRaghupathiV. An empirical study of chronic diseases in the United States: a visual analytics approach to Public Health. Int J Environ Res Public Health2018; 15(3): 431.
14.
KrauSD. The difference between palliative care and end of life care: more than semantics. Nurs Clin North Am2016; 51(3): ix–x.
15.
Institute of Medicine. Dying in America: improving quality and honoring individual preferences near the end of life. Washington, D.C.: The National Academies Press, 2015.
16.
HuiDKimSHRoquemoreJ, et al. Impact of timing and setting of palliative care referral on quality of end-of-life care in cancer patients. Cancer2014; 120(11): 1743–1749.
17.
HoergerMGreerJAJacksonVA, et al. Defining the elements of early palliative care that are associated with patient-reported outcomes and the delivery of end-of-life care. J Clin Oncol2018; 36(11): 1096–1102.
18.
MerchantSJBroglySBGoldieC, et al. Palliative care is associated with reduced aggressive end-of-life care in patients with gastrointestinal cancer. Ann Surg Oncol2018; 25(6): 1478–1487.
19.
MorrisonRSAugustinRSouvannaP, et al. America’s care of serious illness: a state-by-state report card on access to palliative care in our nation’s hospitals. J Palliat Med2011; 14(10): 1094–1096.
20.
National Consensus Project for Quality Palliative Care. Clinical practice guidelines for quality palliative care. 4th ed.Richmond, VA: National Coalition for Hospice and Palliative care, 2018. https://www.nationalcoalitionhpc.org/ncp
21.
JabareenY. Building a conceptual framework: philosophy, definitions, and procedure. Int J Qual Methods2009; 8(4): 49–62.
22.
FawcettJDeSanto-MadeyaAS. Contemporary nursing knowledge: analysis and evaluation of nursing models and theories. 3rd ed.Philadelphia, PA: F.A. Davis Company, 2013.
23.
CohenCCShangJ. Evaluation of conceptual frameworks applicable to the study of isolation precautions effectiveness. J Adv Nurs2015; 71(10): 2279–2292.
24.
MoherDLiberatiATetzlaffJ, et al. Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS Med2009; 6(7): e1000097.
25.
KellermeyerLHarnkeBKnightS. Covidence and Rayyan. J Med Libr Assoc2018; 106(4): 580–583.
26.
BengtssonM. How to plan and perform a qualitative study using content analysis. NursingPlus Open2016; 2: 8–14.
27.
HickeyGKippingC. A multi-stage approach to the coding of data from open-ended questions. Nurse Res1996; 4(1): 81–91.
28.
KelleyASMorrisonRSWengerNS, et al. Determinants of treatment intensity for patients with serious illness: a new conceptual framework. J Palliat Med2010; 13(7): 807–813.
29.
VeilletteAMFillionLWilsonDM, et al. La Belle Mort en milieu rural: a report of an ethnographic study of the good death for Quebec rural francophones. J Palliat Care2010; 26(3): 159–166.
30.
ZafarSYCurrowDCDaughertyCK, et al. Standards for palliative care delivery in oncology settings. Cancer J2010; 16(5): 436–443.
31.
FinebergICKawashimaMAschSM. Communication with families facing life-threatening illness: a research-based model for family conferences. J Palliat Med2011; 14(4): 421–427.
32.
LongCO. Cultural and spiritual considerations in palliative care. J Pediatr Hematol Oncol2011; 33Suppl 2: S96–101.
33.
JonnalagaddaSBergamoCLinJJ, et al. Beliefs and attitudes about lung cancer screening among smokers. Lung Cancer2012; 77(3): 526–531.
34.
WrightDKGrosCP. Theory inspired practice for end-of-life cancer care: an exploration of the McGill model of nursing. Can Oncol Nurs J2012; 22(3): 175–189.
35.
PenmanJOliverMHarringtonA. The relational model of spiritual engagement depicted by palliative care clients and caregivers. Int J Nurs Pract2013; 19(1): 39–46.
36.
HuiDDe La CruzMMoriM, et al. Concepts and definitions for "supportive care," "best supportive care,” “palliative care,” and “hospice care” in the published literature, dictionaries, and textbooks. Support Care Cancer2013; 21(3): 659–685.
37.
LiHCRichardsonASpeckP, et al. Conceptualizations of dignity at the end of life: exploring theoretical and cultural congruence with dignity therapy. J Adv Nurs2014; 70(12): 2920–2931.
38.
GoodmanCFroggattKAmadorS, et al. End of life care interventions for people with dementia in care homes: addressing uncertainty within a framework for service delivery and evaluation. BMC Palliat Care2015; 14: 42.
39.
SinuffTDodekPYouJJ, et al. Improving end-of-life communication and decision making: the development of a conceptual framework and quality indicators. J Pain Symptom Manag2015; 49(6): 1070–1080.
40.
HoAHLukJKChanFH, et al. Dignified palliative long-term care: an interpretive systemic framework of end-of-life integrated care pathway for terminally ill Chinese older adults. Am J Hosp Palliat Care2016; 33(5): 439–447.
41.
DayalAMJenkinsMEJogMS, et al. Palliative care discussions in multiple system atrophy: a retrospective review. Can J Neurol Sci2017; 44(3): 276–282.
42.
KimKHeinzeKXuJ, et al. Theories of health care decision making at the end of life: a meta-ethnography. West J Nurs Res2018; 40(12): 1861–1884.
43.
LadinKButtafarroKHahnE, et al. “End-of-life care? I’m not going to worry about that yet.” Health literacy gaps and end-of-life planning among elderly dialysis patients. Gerontologist2018; 58(2): 290–299.
44.
LeeSM. Lee geropalliative caring model: a situation-specific theory for older adults. ANS Adv Nurs Sci2018; 41(2): 161–173.
45.
PhilipJCollinsABrandC, et al. A proposed framework of supportive and palliative care for people with high-grade glioma. Neuro Oncol2018; 20(3): 391–399.
46.
PhilipJCrawfordGBrandC, et al. A conceptual model: redesigning how we provide palliative care for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Palliat Support Care2018; 16(4): 452–460.
47.
SandersJJCurtisJRTulskyJA. Achieving goal-concordant care: a conceptual model and approach to measuring serious illness communication and its impact. J Palliat Med2018; 21(S2): S17–S27.
48.
SinclairSJaggiPHackTF, et al. Assessing the credibility and transferability of the patient compassion model in non-cancer palliative populations. BMC Palliat Care2018; 17(1): 108.
49.
ThiamwongLPungchompooW. Embedding palliative care into healthy aging: a narrative case study from Thailand. J Hosp Palliat Nurs2018; 20(4): 416–420.
50.
DaleySMurrayJFarinaN, et al. Understanding the quality of life of family carers of people with dementia: development of a new conceptual framework. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry2019; 34(1): 79–86.
51.
GazawaySStewartMSchumacherA. Integrating palliative care into the chronic illness continuum: a conceptual model for minority populations. J Racial Ethn Health Disparities2019; 6(6): 1078–1086.
52.
GonellaSBassoIDe MarinisMG, et al. Good end-of-life care in nursing home according to the family carers’ perspective: a systematic review of qualitative findings. Palliat Med2019; 33(6): 589–606.
53.
WatsonJ. Developing the senses framework to support relationship-centred care for people with advanced dementia until the end of life in care homes. Dementia2019; 18(2): 545–566.
54.
ZimmermannCRyanSHannonB, et al. Team-based outpatient early palliative care: a complex cancer intervention. BMJ Support Palliat Care2019; 1–10.
55.
KongsuwanWTouhyT. Promoting peaceful death for Thai Buddhists: implications for holistic end-of-life care. Holist Nurs Pract2009; 23(5): 289–296.
56.
Bern-KlugM. A framework for categorizing social interactions related to end-of-life care in nursing homes. Gerontologist2009; 49(4): 495–507.
57.
BuckHGOvercashJMcMillanSC. The geriatric cancer experience at the end of life: testing an adapted model. Oncol Nurs Forum2009; 36(6): 664–673.
58.
CurtisJRWenrichMDCarlineJD, et al. Understanding physicians’ skills at providing end-of-life care perspectives of patients, families, and health care workers. J Gen Intern Med2001; 16(1): 41–49.
59.
HebertRSArnoldRMSchulzR. Improving well-being in caregivers of terminally ill patients. Making the case for patient suffering as a focus for intervention research. J Pain Symptom Manag2007; 34(5): 539–546.
60.
HollenPJGrallaRJLiepaAM, et al. Adapting the lung cancer symptom scale (LCSS) to mesothelioma: using the LCSS-meso conceptual model for validation. Cancer2004; 101(3): 587–595.
61.
JerantAFAzariRSNesbittTS, et al. The TLC model of palliative care in the elderly: preliminary application in the assisted living setting. Ann Fam Med2004; 2(1): 54–60.
62.
KoELeeJ. End-of-life communication: ethnic differences between Korean American and non-Hispanic White older adults. J Aging Health2009; 21(7): 967–984.
63.
KwakJHaleyWEChiribogaDA. Racial differences in hospice use and In-hospital death among medicare and medicaid dual-eligible nursing home residents. Gerontologist2008; 48(1): 32–41.
64.
NolanMBrownJDaviesS, et al. (eds). The senses framework: improving care for older people through a relationship-centred approach. Getting Research into Practice (GRiP). Report no. 2, 2006.
65.
NolanMTMockV. A conceptual framework for end-of-life care: a reconsideration of factors influencing the integrity of the human person. J Prof Nurs2004; 20(6): 351–360.
66.
TangWRAaronsonLSForbesSA. Quality of life in hospice patients with terminal illness. West J Nurs Res2004; 26(1): 113–128.
67.
YedidiaMJ. Transforming doctor-patient relationships to promote patient-centered care: lessons from palliative care. J Pain Symptom Manag2007; 33(1): 40–57.
68.
AyersTA. A partnership in like-minded thinking-generating hopefulness in persons with cancer. Med Health Care Philos2007; 10(1): 65–80.
69.
PotterC. The delivery of dignity when caring for older people. Br J Commun Nurs2008; 13(9): 430–432.
70.
PayneSFroggattKO’SheaE, et al. Improving palliative and end-of-life care for older people in Ireland: a new model and framework for institutional care. J Palliat Care2009; 25(3): 218–226.
71.
Robles-SilvaL. The caregiving trajectory among poor and chronically ill people. Qual Health Res2008; 18(3): 358–368.
72.
JonnagaddalaJLiawSTRayP, et al. Coronary artery disease risk assessment from unstructured electronic health records using text mining. J Biomed Inform2015; 58 Suppl: S203–S210.
73.
SandersJSolbergBGaugerM. Breaking barriers to care: A community of solution for chronic disease management. J Am Board Fam Med2013; 26(3): 311–315.
74.
EmanuelEJEmanuelLL. The promise of a good death. Lancet1998; 351: SII21–SII29.
75.
StreetRlJr.MillayB. Analyzing patient participation in medical encounters. Health Commun2001; 13(1): 61–73.
76.
WagnerEH. Chronic disease management: what will it take to improve care for chronic illness?Eff Clin Pract1998; 1(1): 2–4.
77.
BodenheimerTWagnerEHGrumbachK. Improving primary care for patients with chronic illness. JAMA2002; 288(14): 1775–1779.
78.
ColemanKAustinBTBrachC, et al. Evidence on the chronic care model in the new millennium. Health Aff2009; 28(1): 75–85.
EdwardsAPangNShiuV, et al. Review: the understanding of spirituality and the potential role of spiritual care in end-of-life and palliative care: a meta-study of qualitative research. Palliat Med2010; 24(8): 753–770.
81.
GijsbertsMHELiefbroerAIOttenR, et al. Spiritual care in palliative care: a systematic review of the recent European literature. Med Sci2019; 7(2): 25.
82.
BostonPBruceASchreiberR. Existential suffering in the palliative care setting: an integrated literature review. J Pain Symptom Manag2011; 41(3): 604–618.
83.
Delgado-GuayMOHuiDParsonsHA, et al. Spirituality, religiosity, and spiritual pain in advanced cancer patients. J Pain Symptom Manag2011; 41(6): 986–994.
84.
SandLOlssonMStrangP. Supporting in an existential crisis: a mixed-methods evaluation of a training model in palliative care. Palliat Support Care2018; 16(4): 470–478.
85.
DrillaudFSaussacCKeuschF, et al. The existential dimension of palliative care: the mirror effect of death on life. OMEGA2022; 85: 915–935.
86.
MorinLJohnellKVan den BlockL, et al. Discussing end-of-life issues in nursing homes: a nationwide study in France. Age Ageing2016; 45(3): 395–402.
87.
FinocchiaroDN. Supporting the patient’s spiritual needs at the end of life. Nurs Crit Care2017; 12(2): 32–36.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
