***TASK*** the task is to summarize an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***INPUT*** the input is a biomedical literature 
    ***OUTPUT*** the output is the summary of an input biomedical literature in six sentences 
    ***DOCUMENTATION*** 
    ***EXAMPLES*** 
    Input: Palliative care at the end of life involves meeting the physical , psychological , social , and practical needs of patients and caregivers . End of life is defined as a phase of life when a person is living with an illness that will worsen and eventually cause death . It is not limited to the short period of time when the person is moribund ( 1 ) . Good clinical care can prevent or alleviate suffering for many patients at the end of life by assessing symptoms and providing psychological and social support to the patients and their families . The purpose of this guideline is to present the available evidence to improve palliative care at the end of life . This guideline does not address any other setting s of palliative care at the end of life . The target audience for this guideline is all clinicians caring for patients needing end-of-life care . The target patient population is everyone with seriously disabling or symptomatic chronic conditions at the end of life . These recommendations are based on the systematic evidence review in the background paper in this issue by Lorenz and colleagues ( 1 ) , which is based on an Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality ( AHRQ ) evidence report ( 2 ) . End-of-life care has been identified by the Institute of Medicine as one of the priority areas to improve quality of health care ( 3 ) . The Institute of Medicine report identified specific gaps related to end-of-life care , such as pain control in advanced cancer and care for patients with advanced organ failure . High- quality evidence on end-of-life care is limited , and most of the evidence is derived from the literature that focused on patients with cancer ; therefore , this guideline does not address many important aspects of end-of-life care . For example , nutritional support , complementary and alternative therapies , and spiritual care were not part of the review . If an end-of-life intervention is not addressed in this guideline , it does not mean that no benefit is related to that particular intervention , but it indicates that the intervention has not been sufficiently studied to demonstrate efficacy . Some important topics in end-of-life care , such as interpersonal and social interventions , may be especially difficult to study . The American College of Physicians ' End-of-Life Care Consensus Panel has a series of papers related to ethical issues around end-of-life care that can be accessed from its Web site ( www.acponline.org/ethics/papers.htm ) . Methods The literature search for this guideline included studies from MEDLINE and review s of cancer , congestive heart failure , and dementia from the Data base of Abstract of Review s of Effects from January 1990 to November 2005 . Citations from the non systematic literature were taken from the review by the National Consensus Project for Quality Palliative Care ( 4 ) . The review included only English- language publications from the United States , Canada , Western Europe , Australia , and New Zeal and . Details about the methods used for the systematic evidence review may be found in detail in the background paper in this issue ( 1 ) . The objective for this guideline was to answer the following questions : 1 . What are the critical elements for clinicians to address when caring for persons coming to the end of life ? 2 . What do definitions of the end of life suggest about identifying patients who could benefit from palliative approaches  ? 3 . What treatment strategies work well for pain , dyspnea , and depression ? 4 . What elements are important in advance care planning for patients coming to the end of life ? 5 . What elements of collaboration and consultation are effective in promoting improved end-of-life care ? 6 . What elements of assessment and support are effective for serving caregivers , including family , when patients are coming to the end of life ? This guideline grade s the evidence and recommendations using the American College of Physicians ' clinical practice guidelines grading system , adopted from the classification developed by the Grading of Recommendations , Assessment , Development , and Evaluation ( GRADE ) workgroup ( Table ) . Table . The American College of Physicians ' Guideline Grading System * Critical Elements for End-of-Life Care There is a wide range of critical elements for patients nearing the end of life , as well as for their caregivers . Preventing and treating pain and other symptoms ; supporting families and caregivers ; ensuring the continuity of care ; ensuring respect for persons and informed decision making ; attending to well-being , including existential and spiritual concerns ; and supporting function and survival duration are general issues that are common for most end-of-life care patients ( 411 ) . Identifying Patients Who Could Benefit from  Palliative Approaches The literature review did not identify any evidence -based tools that have been vali date d and shown to predict the optimal timing to initiate palliative care services . Decisions to initiate palliative care at the end of life should be individualized on the basis of patient symptoms and preferences . Treatment Strategies Pain Strong evidence from trials of patients with cancer supports the use of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs , opioids , bisphosphonates , and radiotherapy or radiopharmaceuticals for pain ( 12 ) . Bisphosphonates are specifically effective for bone pain . However , head-to-head comparisons of specific drugs or reports on delivery strategies are difficult to do because of method ological issues and heterogeneity ( 12 ) . Evidence was insufficient to assess the usefulness of exercise or acupuncture in pain management ( 13 , 14 ) . A meta- analysis that included 43 studies showed that palliative care teams are modestly beneficial in providing care for pain management compared with usual care teams ( effect size , 0.13 SD [ 95 % CI , 0.11 to 0.63 SD ] ) ( 15 ) . Other studies that evaluated quality of life showed no difference ( 16 ) and no effect of palliative care consultation ( in contrast to palliative care teams ) on pain scores ( 17 ) . Dyspnea Evidence from 13 studies shows a valuable effect of morphine for dyspnea in advanced lung disease ( st and ardized mean difference , 0.31 [ CI , 0.50 to 0.13 ] ) ( 18 ) . This is also supported by other studies that show the benefits of morphine for treating dyspnea in advanced lung disease and terminal cancer ( 19 , 20 ) . However , using nebulized opioids compared with oral opioids showed no additional benefit . Also , 1 study showed that dihydrocodeine result ed in a statistically but not clinical ly significant increase in Pco 2 during treatment ( 18 ) . Good- quality evidence shows that long-acting -agonists are beneficial in the treatment of dyspnea in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease ( 21 ) . Twelve studies evaluated various interventions for reducing dyspnea in patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease , heart failure , cancer , or all conditions . Evidence was mixed when comparing oxygen therapy with room air . One study showed better oxygen saturation , respiratory effort and rate , and dyspnea with oxygen ( 19 ) . However , Bruera and colleagues ( 20 ) showed no difference in dyspnea and fatigue between oxygen and air after a 6-minute walk test . Studies that evaluated service delivery showed no effect of facilitated patientprovider communication or palliative care consultation for dyspnea treatment ( 16 , 17 , 22 , 23 ) . Depression Good evidence supports the effectiveness of long-term use of tricyclic antidepressants or selective serotonin reuptake inhibitors , as well as psychosocial interventions ( education , cognitive and noncognitive behavioral therapy , informational interventions , and individual and group support ) for treating patients with cancer who have depression ( 12 ) . Gysels and Higginson ( 24 ) identified 15 intervention studies that showed that behavioral interventions were effective in the treatment of depression , whereas 1 complementary medicine intervention was ineffective for depression ( 24 ) . Evidence for using guided imagery and exercise showed mixed results ( 13 , 25 ) . Palliative care for out patients did not have any effect on depression and anxiety , and care coordination showed no effect on  depression  in patients with cancer near the end of life ( 22 , 23 , 26 , 27 ) . Important Elements for Advance Care Planning Research shows that individuals are more likely to use advance directives in the presence of extensive multicomponent interventions than with limited interventions ( 28 , 29 ) . One study showed that hospice use increased when goal -oriented interviews and decisions between palliative care facilitators and patients were communicated to nursing home physicians ( 30 ) . In addition , another study showed an increase in documented treatment limitations and preference-concordant care for patients served by social workers trained in care planning ( 31 ) . Also , proactive communication from skilled discussants , such as an ethics team , can help reduce utilization of unnecessary services without harming patients or family members ( 32 , 33 ) . In summary , various processes , such as consulting caregivers , enhancing clear communication , eliciting values , and addressing the emotional context , are important elements for comprehensive advance care planning . Clinicians should help patients and families plan in advance for likely or important clinical decisions . Collaboration and Consultation to Improve End-of-Life Care Studies have shown that the following factors improve utilization outcomes and patient-centered outcomes : multidisciplinary teams involving nurses and social services , continuity of care and service coordination , and facilitated communication . A meta- analysis of 29 r and omized , controlled trials done by McAlister and colleagues ( 34 ) showed that follow-up by a multidisciplinary team result ed in decreased hospitalizations due to heart failure . In addition , a multidisciplinary approach also improved patients ' quality of life and functional status ( 34 , 35 ) . Another intervention study showed that coordination between primary physician and The potential benefits of health-related quality of life ( HRQL ) assessment in oncology clinical practice include better detection of problems , enhanced disease and treatment monitoring and improved care . However , few empirical studies have investigated the effects of incorporating such assessment s into routine clinical care . Recent r and omized studies have reported improved detection of and communication about patients ' concerns , but few have found effects on patient HRQL or satisfaction . This study examined whether offering interpretive assistance of HRQL results would improve these patient outcomes . Two hundred and thirteen participants with metastatic breast , lung or colorectal cancer were r and omly assigned to one of three conditions : usual care ; HRQL assessment or HRQL assessment followed by a structured interview and discussion . Interviews about patients ' assessment responses were conducted by a research nurse , who then presented HRQL information to the treating nurse . HRQL and treatment satisfaction outcomes were assessed at 3 and 6 months . No significant differences were found between study conditions in HRQL or satisfaction . Results suggest that routine HRQL assessment , even with description of results , is insufficient to improve patient HRQL and satisfaction . It is suggested that positive effects may require supplementing assessment results with specific suggestions for clinical management changes OBJECTIVE This study evaluated a psychosocial screening intervention that offers cancer patients counselling . The assumption underlying the intervention was that barriers are often present that hamper patients ' awareness of and active request for psychosocial care . An active yet unobtrusive approach was hypothesized to improve accessibility to psychosocial services . METHODS In a sequential cohort design , patients newly admitted to the oncology department of an academic hospital were assigned to a usual care group ( n=50 ) or a screening group ( n=79 ) . A retrospective , medical records group ( n=89 ) was also included . At baseline and 4 weeks following discharge , the usual care and screening groups completed mental health and quality of life question naires . RESULTS Half the screening group actually wanted and received counselling . At follow-up , the screening group reported significantly less pain , better mental health and better physical and role functioning than the usual care group . CONCLUSION The face-to-face screening intervention appears an effective means of identifying patients interested in obtaining formal psychosocial counselling , and may result in improvements in physical and mental health outcomes . PRACTICE IMPLICATION S This screening intervention may be particularly useful for hospitals that prefer a personal approach to psychosocial screening , but do not have sufficient re sources to interview every new patient Purpose : To develop and preliminarily evaluate a Social Difficulties Inventory ( SDI ) for use in oncology practice . Methods : Item generation from patients ( n=96 ) , staff ( n=49 ) and the literature . Questions constructed and pre-tested ( n=42 ) result ing in a 22-item question naire . Psychometric evaluation ( n=271 ) assessed frequency of endorsement , factor structure , summated scales and construct validity followed by r and omisation to criterion validity or test-retest arms . Results : Items met preset frequency of endorsement criteria . Factor analysis revealed a four-factor structure , three clearly definable , ( 1 ) Physical ability , ( 2 ) Providing for the family and ( 3 ) Contact with others , explaining 45.8 % variance . Summated scales developed from these demonstrated good reliability ( Cronbach ’s alpha > 0.7 ) and were used to test and confirmed construct validity . Several comparators from the Life Events and Difficulties Schedule ( LEDS ) and CAncer Rehabilitation Evaluation System Short Form ( CARES-SF ) tested criterion validity and majority agreements were moderate to good . Test – retest reliability was good with most kappa values > 0.6 . One item was eliminated result ing in a 21-item question naire . Conclusion : The SDI is relevant and easy to underst and . Initial psychometric evaluation was encouraging . Ongoing work to evaluate the clinical meaning and utility of the instrument and to examine the relationships between SDI scores and clinical outcomes will provide guidance about its usefulness as an assessment tool in routine oncology practice PURPOSE To determine whether making patient-reported cancer needs , quality -of-life ( QOL ) , and psychosocial information available to the health care team , allowing coordinated specifically targeted psychosocial interventions , result ed in reduced cancer needs , improved QOL , and increased satisfaction with care received . METHODS Self-reported cancer needs , QOL , and psychosocial information was collected from 450 people with cancer , using st and ardized question naires via a touch-screen computer .  For a r and omly chosen two thirds , this information was made available to the health care team who 
    Output:
    
Overall , this body of literature suggested that routine collection of psychosocial health care data has an influence on communication with oncologists and other study specific outcomes , but the evidence was limited by heterogeneity and method ological limitations .
Based on the interpretation of this body of evidence by clinical experts , research method ologists , and external review ers , 12 substantive recommendations were developed regarding the process and parameters of psychosocial needs assessment in adult cancer patients .