Opioid prescribing for cancer pain in Latin America: systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To explore opioid prescribing patterns for cancer pain in Latin America (LA). METHODS: A systematic review was conducted adhering to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses. Relevant databases, including MEDLINE, EMBASE, PubMed, LILACS and Scielo, were searched from inception to June 2023. Empirical studies of opioid prescription patterns in adult palliative care patients with cancer pain were included. Methodological quality was assessed using the Effective Public Health Practice Project tool. Data were analysed using narrative synthesis. Descriptive statistical analyses were conducted using SPSS V.28 (IBM). Categorical variables were summarised using frequencies and percentages and continuous variables as means or medians. RESULTS: Seventeen studies from six countries were included. Ten were observational, while seven were experimental, including five randomised controlled trials (RCT) and two non-RCT. Most were low or moderate methodological quality. Out of 7809 patients, morphine (54%) and tramadol (18%) were the most prescribed opioids. The median of morphine equivalent daily dose was 26 mg (IQR 26-41). CONCLUSION: Latin America shows lower opioid consumption rates compared with high-income countries for control pain management (CPM). More rigorous research on CPM in LA is needed. Additionally, a comprehensive review of opioid prescription patterns, including non-cancer diagnoses, is necessary.

Attitudes and preferences towards palliative and end of life care in patients with advanced illness and their family caregivers in Latin America: A mixed studies systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Achieving universal access to palliative care is considered a global and equity priority. Understanding patients and caregivers' attitudes and preferences towards palliative and end-of-life care in Latin America is essential to develop person-centred services in the region. AIM: To synthesize and appraise the evidence about patients with advanced illness and their caregivers' attitudes and preferences towards palliative and end-of-life care in Latin America. DESIGN: Mixed studies systematic review with sequential exploratory synthesis (thematic and narrative synthesis). Quality was assessed using the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, Lilacs, Web of Science, Scielo and Scopus to March 2021. Empirical studies examining patient or caregiver attitudes and/or preferences towards palliative and end-of-life care were included. RESULTS: Of 3575 records screened, 45 articles were included, comprising 7 countries and a total of 1220 patients and 965 caregivers (26.8% non-cancer-related participants). Data were organized around seven themes: Symptom management and nutrition; End-of-life medical decisions; Communication patterns; Place of end-of-life care and death; God and religious community as source of hope and support; Caregiver's role; and Mixed understandings of palliative care. Main findings include; conflicted views around palliative care and pain relief; patients' preference to be informed about their condition contrasting with caregivers' reluctance to discuss this with patients; common preference for shared decision-making; and overburdened caregivers lacking professional home-care support. Methodological flaws were found in general. CONCLUSION: Core themes provide context-specific evidence to inform the design of culturally sensitive palliative and end-of-life care services, models and public policies in Latin America.

Real-world ethics in palliative care: A systematic review of the ethical challenges reported by specialist palliative care practitioners in their clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Ethical issues arise daily in the delivery of palliative care. Despite much (largely theoretical) literature, evidence from specialist palliative care practitioners about day-to-day ethical challenges has not previously been synthesised. This evidence is crucial to inform education and adequately support staff. AIM: To synthesise the evidence regarding the ethical challenges which specialist palliative care practitioners encounter during clinical practice. DESIGN: Systematic review with narrative synthesis (PROSPERO registration CRD42018105365). Quality was dual-assessed using the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool. Tabulation, textural description, concept mapping and thematic synthesis were used to develop and present the narrative. DATA SOURCES: Seven databases (MEDLINE, Philosopher's Index, EMBASE, PsycINFO, LILACS, Web of Science and CINAHL) were searched from inception to December 2019 without language limits. Eligible papers reported original research using inductive methods to describe practitioner-reported ethical challenges. RESULTS: A total of 8074 records were screened. Thirteen studies from nine countries were included. Challenges were organised into six themes: application of ethical principles; delivering clinical care; working with families; engaging with institutional structures and values; navigating societal values and expectations; philosophy of palliative care. Challenges related to specific scenarios/contexts rather than the application of general ethical principles, and occurred at all levels (bedside, institution, society, policy). CONCLUSION: Palliative care practitioners encounter a broad range of contextual ethical challenges, many of which are not represented in palliative care ethics training resources, for example, navigating institutional policies, resource allocation and inter-professional conflict. Findings have implications for supporting ethical practice and training practitioners. The lack of low- and middle- income country data needs addressing.

Real-world ethics in palliative care: protocol for a systematic review of the ethical challenges reported by specialist palliative care practitioners in their clinical practice.

INTRODUCTION: Ethical issues arise daily in the delivery of palliative care. Despite much (largely theoretical) literature, evidence from specialist palliative care practitioners (SPCPs) about real-world ethical challenges has not previously been synthesised. This evidence is crucial to inform education and training and adequately support staff. The aim of this systematic review is to synthesise the evidence regarding the ethical challenges which SPCPs encounter during clinical practice. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic review with narrative synthesis of empirical studies that use inductive methods to describe the ethical challenges reported by SPCPs. We will search multiple databases (MEDLINE, Philosopher's Index, EMBASE, PsycINFO, LILACS, WHOLIS, Web of Science and CINAHL) without time, language or geographical restrictions. Keywords will be developed from scoping searches, consultation with information specialists and reference to key systematic reviews in palliative care and bioethics. Reference lists of included studies will be hand-searched. 10% of retrieved titles and abstracts will be independently dual screened, as will all full text papers. Quality will be dual assessed using the Mixed-Methods Appraisal Tool (2018). Narrative synthesis following Popay et al (2006) will be used to synthesise findings. The strength of resulting recommendations will be assessed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach for qualitative evidence (GRADE-CERQual). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: As this review will include only published data, no specific ethical approval is required. We anticipate that the systematic review will be of interest to palliative care practitioners of all backgrounds and educators in palliative care and medical ethics. Findings will be presented at conferences and published open access in a peer-reviewed journal. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42018105365.