Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2009 Jun;18(3):174-80.
doi: 10.1136/qshc.2007.024836.

A national facilitation project to improve primary palliative care: impact of the Gold Standards Framework on process and self-ratings of quality

J Dale  1 , M Petrova, D Munday, J Koistinen-Harris, R Lall, K Thomas
Affiliations

A national facilitation project to improve primary palliative care: impact of the Gold Standards Framework on process and self-ratings of quality

J Dale et al. Qual Saf Health Care. 2009 Jun.

Abstract

Background: Improving quality of end-of-life care is a key driver of UK policy. The Gold Standards Framework (GSF) for Palliative Care aims to strengthen primary palliative care through facilitating implementation of systematic clinical and organisational processes.

Objectives: To describe the general practices that participated in the GSF programme in 2003-5 and the changes in process and perception of quality that occurred in the year following entry into the programme, and to identify factors associated with the extent of change.

Methods: Participating practices completed a questionnaire at baseline and another approximately 12 months later. Data were derived from categorical questions about the implementation of 35 organisational and clinical processes, and self-rated assessments of quality, associated with palliative care provision.

Participants: 1305 practices (total registered population almost 10 million). Follow-up questionnaire completed by 955 (73.2%) practices (after mean (SD) 12.8 (2.8) months; median 13 months).

Findings: Mean increase in total number of processes implemented (maximum = 35) was 9.6 (95% CI 9.0 to 10.2; p<0.001; baseline: 15.7 (SD 6.4), follow-up: 25.2 (SD 5.2)). Extent of change was largest for practices with low baseline scores. Aspects of process related to coordination and communication showed the greatest change. All dimensions of quality improved following GSF implementation; change was highest for the "quality of palliative care for cancer patients" and "confidence in assessing, recording and addressing the physical and psychosocial areas of patient care".

Conclusion: Implementation of the GSF seems to have resulted in substantial improvements in process and quality of palliative care. Further research is required of the extent to which this has enhanced care (physical, practical and psychological outcomes) for patients and carers.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

Competing interests: KT is the National Clinical Lead for the GSF Programme (http://www.goldstandardsframework.nhs.uk).

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Degree of change relative to baseline process score.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

See all "Cited by" articles

References

    1. Murray S, Boyd K, Sheikh A, et al. Developing primary palliative care. BMJ 2004;329:1056–7 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Munday D, Dale J. Palliative care in the community. BMJ 2007;334:809–10 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Borgsteede S, Graafland-Riedstra C, Deliens L, et al. Good end-of-life care according to patients and their GPs. Br J Gen Pract 2006;53:20–6 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Aabom B, Kragstrup J, Vondeling H, et al. Population-based study of place of death of patients with cancer: implications for GPs. Br J Gen Pract 2005;55:684–9 - PMC - PubMed
    1. Kendall M, Boyd K, Campbell C, et al. How do people with cancer wish to be cared for in primary care? Serial discussion groups of patients and carers. Fam Pract 2006;23:644–50 - PubMed

Publication types