OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the evidence on the transition process from child to adult services for young people with palliative care needs. DESIGN: Systematic review. SETTING: Child and adult services and interface between healthcare providers. PATIENTS: Young people aged 13-24 years with palliative care conditions in the process of transition. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Young people and their families' experiences of transition, the process of transition between services and its impact on continuity of care and models of good practice. RESULTS: 92 studies included. Papers on transition services were of variable quality when applied to palliative care contexts. Most focussed on common life-threatening and life-limiting conditions. No standardised transition program identified and most guidelines used to develop transition services were not evidence-based. Most studies on transition programs were predominantly condition-specific (eg, cystic fibrosis (CF), cancer) services. CF services offered high-quality transition with the most robust empirical evaluation. There were differing condition-dependent viewpoints on when transition should occur but agreement on major principles guiding transition planning and probable barriers. There was evidence of poor continuity between child and adult providers with most originating from within child settings. CONCLUSIONS: Palliative care was not, in itself, a useful concept for locating transition-related evidence. It is not possible to evaluate the merits of the various transition models for palliative care contexts, or their effects on continuity of care, as there are no long-term outcome data to measure their effectiveness. Use of validated outcome measures would facilitate research and service development.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the evidence on the transition process from child to adult services for young people with palliative care needs. DESIGN: Systematic review. SETTING:Child and adult services and interface between healthcare providers. PATIENTS: Young people aged 13-24 years with palliative care conditions in the process of transition. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Young people and their families' experiences of transition, the process of transition between services and its impact on continuity of care and models of good practice. RESULTS: 92 studies included. Papers on transition services were of variable quality when applied to palliative care contexts. Most focussed on common life-threatening and life-limiting conditions. No standardised transition program identified and most guidelines used to develop transition services were not evidence-based. Most studies on transition programs were predominantly condition-specific (eg, cystic fibrosis (CF), cancer) services. CF services offered high-quality transition with the most robust empirical evaluation. There were differing condition-dependent viewpoints on when transition should occur but agreement on major principles guiding transition planning and probable barriers. There was evidence of poor continuity between child and adult providers with most originating from within child settings. CONCLUSIONS: Palliative care was not, in itself, a useful concept for locating transition-related evidence. It is not possible to evaluate the merits of the various transition models for palliative care contexts, or their effects on continuity of care, as there are no long-term outcome data to measure their effectiveness. Use of validated outcome measures would facilitate research and service development.
Authors: Tim Luckett; Jane Phillips; Meera Agar; Claudia Virdun; Anna Green; Patricia M Davidson Journal: BMC Health Serv Res Date: 2014-03-26 Impact factor: 2.655
Authors: Jane Noyes; Rhiannon Tudor Edwards; Richard P Hastings; Richard Hain; Vasiliki Totsika; Virginia Bennett; Lucie Hobson; Gareth R Davies; Ciarán Humphreys; Mary Devins; Llinos Haf Spencer; Mary Lewis Journal: BMC Palliat Care Date: 2013-04-25 Impact factor: 3.234
Authors: Allan F Colver; Hannah Merrick; Mark Deverill; Ann Le Couteur; Jeremy Parr; Mark S Pearce; Tim Rapley; Luke Vale; Rose Watson; Helen McConachie Journal: BMC Public Health Date: 2013-07-23 Impact factor: 3.295
Authors: Alenka J Brooks; Philip J Smith; Richard Cohen; Paul Collins; Andrew Douds; Valda Forbes; Daniel R Gaya; Brian T Johnston; Patrick J McKiernan; Charles D Murray; Shaji Sebastian; Monica Smith; Lisa Whitley; Lesley Williams; Richard K Russell; Sara A McCartney; James O Lindsay Journal: Gut Date: 2017-02-21 Impact factor: 23.059