Systematic translation and adaptation of the FOCUS program, a USA-based supportive intervention for persons with cancer and their family caregivers, for use in six European countries.

PURPOSE: Having advanced cancer presents many challenges for patients and family caregivers. The FOCUS program is a psychoeducational nurse-led intervention, developed in the USA, to support dyads of patients with cancer and their family caregivers to live with the illness. The program includes a conversation manual and information resources for dyads. We aimed to develop a version of the program for dyads facing advanced cancer in six European countries. METHOD: The Participatory and Iterative Process Framework for Language Adaptation (PIPFLA) was used to guide the translation of the program to the local contexts of Belgium, Denmark, Ireland, Italy, the Netherlands, and the UK. In several rounds, potential program users (e.g., nurses, clinicians, patients, family caregivers) and researchers from all six countries reviewed program materials and advised on adaptations. RESULTS: The PIPFLA process resulted in one European version of the program in different languages (FOCUS +). The FOCUS + conversation manual is uniform across all countries. The main adaptations included additional attention to both family caregiver and patient needs; more emphasis on self-management, advance care planning, and shared responsibilities; discussing the dyad's outlook rather than optimism; addressing the role of nurses as educational rather than therapeutic; and more suggestions to refer dyads to health care professionals for specific care needs. The information resources for dyads were adapted to fit with local contexts. CONCLUSION: The PIPFLA methodology is an efficient and effective framework to thoroughly translate and culturally adapt a complex USA-based program for use in six European countries in collaboration with end users.

The most important components of out-of-hours community care for patients at the end of life: A Delphi study of healthcare professionals' and patient and family carers' perspectives.

BACKGROUND: Community services for palliative patients outside normal working hours are variable and the best evidence-based models of care have not been determined. AIM: To establish expert consensus on the most important components of out-of-hours community palliative care services. DESIGN: Delphi study. The first round listed 68 components generated from systematic literature reviewing, focus groups with healthcare professionals and input from the project's patient and public involvement advisory group. The components deemed 'essential' by over 70% of participants in the first round were refined and carried forward to a second round, asking participants to rank each on a five-point Likert scale (5 highest to 1 lowest). The consensus threshold was median of 4 to 5 and interquartile range of ⩽1. PARTICIPANTS: Community specialist palliative care health professionals, generalist community health professionals and patients and family carers with experience of receiving care out-of-hours at home. RESULTS: Fifty-four participants completed round 1, and 44 round 2. Forty-five components met the threshold as most important for providing out-of-hours care, with highest consensus for: prescription, delivery and administration of medicines; district and community nurse visits; and shared electronic patient records and advance care plans. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi method identified the most important components to provide community palliative care for patients out-of-hours, which are often provided by non-specialist palliative care professionals. The importance placed on the integration and co-ordination with specialist palliative care through shared electronic records and advance care plans demonstrates the reassurance for patients and families of being known to out-of-hours services.