Palliative Medicine

 

Advanced Search

Journal Navigation

Journal Home

Subscriptions

Archive

Contact Us

Table of Contents

Click here for more information

Sign In to gain access to subscriptions and/or personal tools.
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow References
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to Saved Citations
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Request Reprints
Right arrow Add to My Marked Citations
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Thomas, K.
Right arrow Articles by Noble, B.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Thomas, K.
Right arrow Articles by Noble, B.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us   Add to Digg   Add to Reddit   Add to Technorati  
What's this?
Palliative Medicine, Vol. 21, No. 1, 49-53 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/0269216306072501
© 2007 SAGE Publications

Improving the delivery of palliative care in general practice: an evaluation of the first phase of the Gold Standards Framework

Keri Thomas

John Taylor Hospice, Birmingham and School of Health Sciences, University of Birmingham, Birmingham

Bill Noble

Academic Unit of Supportive Care, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, bill.noble{at}sheffield.ac.uk

Background: The Gold Standards Framework (GSF) was developed to improve the delivery of palliative care in general practice.

Aim: The aim of the study was to evaluate the first phase of GSF in terms of its acceptability to primary care teams, effectiveness in changing practice and professionals’ views on the consequences for patient care.

Methods: A prospective longitudinal comparative survey of 12 participating, 12 matched and 18 other practices included focus groups and questionnaires.

Results: Participating practices reported that the GSF was acceptable. They also reported more standards successfully achieved than matched practices. Registers, team meetings and co-ordinated care were thought to have improved communication, teamwork, patient identification, assessment and care planning.

Conclusions: This small study suggests that the GSF appears to be acceptable and its early introduction to a few teams appears to have changed practice. Participants were positive about the effect on care. An evaluation of national uptake and further research into clinical outcomes is required.

Key Words: family practice • Gold Standards Framework • home death • palliative care • supportive care


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us   Add to Digg Digg   Add to Reddit Reddit   Add to Technorati Technorati    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Fam PractHome page
D. Munday, K. Mahmood, J. Dale, and N. King
Facilitating good process in primary palliative care: does the Gold Standards Framework enable quality performance?
Fam. Pract., October 1, 2007; 24(5): 486 - 494.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]