Abstract:
Background: The benefits of palliative care programs are well documented. However, the effectiveness of specialist palliative care services is not well established. The previous lack of consensus on criteria for defining and characterizing models of care has restrained direct comparison between these models and limited the evidence base to inform policy makers. A rapid review for studies published up to 2012 was unable to find an effective model. Aim: To identify effective models of community specialist palliative care services. Design: A mixed-method synthesis design reported according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guidelines. Prospero: CRD42020151840. Data sources: Medline, PubMed, EMBASE, CINAHL and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched in September 2019 for primary research and review articles from 2012 to 2019. Supplementary search was conducted on Google in 2020 for policy documents to identify additional relevant studies. Results: The search yielded 2255 articles; 36 articles satisfied the eligibility criteria and 6 additional articles were identified from other sources. Eight systematic reviews and 34 primary studies were identified: observational studies (n = 24), randomized controlled trials (n = 5), and qualitative studies (n = 5). Community specialist palliative care was found to improve symptom burden/quality of life and to reduce secondary service utilization across cancer and noncancer diagnoses. Much of this evidence relates to face-to-face care in home-based settings with both round-the-clock and episodic care. There were few studies addressing pediatric populations or minority groups. Findings from qualitative studies revealed that care coordination, provision of practical help, after-hours support, and medical crisis management were some of the factors contributing to patients' and caregivers' positive experience. Conclusion: Strong evidence exists for community specialist palliative care to improve quality of life and reducing secondary service utilization. Future research should focus on equity outcomes and the interface between generalist and specialist care.
