Teaching end-of-life communication: priorities, challenges, scope-systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Without a well-rounded syllabus to teach end-of-life (EOL) communication, medical providers find it challenging to enhance their patients' quality of life at the final stage of life. AIM: The aim of this scoping review was to explore studies about the teaching of EOL communication and to detail how educators can approach the teaching of EOL communication. METHODS: A scoping review of both qualitative and quantitative studies was conducted according to the methodological framework of scoping review. The PsycINFO, PubMed, ERIC, CINAHL and EMBASE databases were searched for studies using the keywords 'teach', 'educat*', 'end of life', 'terminal care', 'communication' and 'palliative care'. Sixteen studies were appraised, and none was rejected on the grounds of quality. RESULTS: The search strategy yielded 22 278 entries and 16 studies were included. Two themes were identified from the priorities in teaching EOL communication: (1) challenges to teaching EOL communication and (2) methods of teaching EOL communication. To present a comprehensive overview of EOL communication teaching, we provide directions for priorities of topics and approaches when teaching EOL communication. CONCLUSIONS: The review detailed the complexity of teaching EOL communication, which indicates the need for a well-rounded syllabus that includes skills such as non-verbal social cues, communication strategies and understanding EOL communication in various cultural contexts to facilitate a well-rounded EOL communication experience for students' future practice.

External Validation of a Nomogram to Predict Survival and Benefit of Concurrent Chemoradiation for Stage II Nasopharyngeal Carcinoma.

A nomogram was recently published by Sun et al. to predict overall survival (OS) and the additional benefit of concurrent chemoradiation (CCRT) vs. radiotherapy (RT) alone, in stage II NPC treated with conventional RT. We aimed to assess the predictors of OS and to externally validate the nomogram in the IMRT era. We analyzed stage II NPC patients treated with definitive RT alone or CCRT between 2001 and 2011 under the territory-wide Hong Kong NPC Study Group 1301 study. Clinical parameters were studied using the Cox proportional hazards model to estimate OS. The nomogram by Sun et al. was applied with 1000 times bootstrap resampling to calculate the concordance index, and we compared the nomogram predicted and observed 5-year OS. There were 482 patients included. The 5-year OS was 89.0%. In the multivariable analysis, an age > 45 years was the only significant predictor of OS (HR, 1.98; 95%CI, 1.15-3.44). Other clinical parameters were insignificant, including the use of CCRT (HR, 0.99; 95%CI, 0.62-1.58). The nomogram yielded a concordance index of 0.55 (95% CI, 0.49-0.62) which lacked clinically meaningful discriminative power. The nomogram proposed by Sun et al. should be interpreted with caution when applied to stage II NPC patients in the IMRT era. The benefit of CCRT remained controversial.