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
. 2024 Mar 5;20(Suppl-1):e17450179183857.
doi: 10.2174/0117450179183857240226094258. eCollection 2024.

Quality of Life in Palliative Care: A Systematic Meta-Review of Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Mauro Demuro  1 , Elisa Bratzu  1 , Stefano Lorrai  1 , Antonio Preti  2
Affiliations

Quality of Life in Palliative Care: A Systematic Meta-Review of Reviews and Meta-Analyses

Mauro Demuro et al. Clin Pract Epidemiol Ment Health. .

Abstract

Background: The area of palliative care is a setting in which the evaluation of the quality of life (QoL) is fundamental. However, the topic has been covered from many different points of view, and there is a lack of comprehensive synthesis of the evidence drawn from the available literature.

Objective: We carried out a meta-review of all available systematic reviews and meta-analyses that have dedicated part or most of the investigation to the assessment of QoL in palliative care to provide the most updated and comprehensive depiction of all available information about measurement and intervention aimed at improving QoL in palliative care.

Methods: A meta-review of all recent (5 years) available systematic reviews and meta-analyses on "palliative care" and "quality of life" was carried out. The quality of the extracted studies was assessed with the AMSTAR scale.

Results: The search extracted 24 systematic reviews, 14 systematic reviews followed by a meta-analysis on a subset of data, and 2 meta-analyses. In many studies, the investigation of QoL represented a secondary or even marginal outcome. In general, the results supported the efficacy of palliative care in terminal patients or patients with a permanent disability. However, the quality of the studies had a strong influence on the chance that some improvement in QoL was found in relation to palliative care. Studies of lower quality were more likely to report some efficacy of palliative care than studies with better quality.

Conclusion: The investigation of QoL in palliative care is understudied. In many studies, QoL is a secondary outcome, and there is some tendency to use a disparate range of tools to measure it, whose reliability and validity should still be established in some groups of patients.

Keywords: Advanced heart failure; Advanced illness; Cancer; Meta-analysis; Palliative care; Quality of life.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest, financial or otherwise.

Figures

Fig. (1)
Fig. (1)
PRISMA flowchart of studies reporting data on quality of life in patients admitted to palliative care.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

Similar articles

See all similar articles

Cited by

References

    1. World Health Organization. 2nd ed. . Genève: 2002. National cancer control programmes : Policies and managerial guidelines, Available from: https://apps.who.int/iris/handle/10665/42494.
    1. Page M.J., McKenzie J.E., Bossuyt P.M., Boutron I., Hoffmann T.C., Mulrow C.D., Shamseer L., Tetzlaff J.M., Akl E.A., Brennan S.E., Chou R., Glanville J., Grimshaw J.M., Hróbjartsson A., Lalu M.M., Li T., Loder E.W., Mayo-Wilson E., McDonald S., McGuinness L.A., Stewart L.A., Thomas J., Tricco A.C., Welch V.A., Whiting P., Moher D. The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ. 2021;372(71):n71. doi: 10.1136/bmj.n71. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shea B.J., Grimshaw J.M., Wells G.A., Boers M., Andersson N., Hamel C., Porter A.C., Tugwell P., Moher D., Bouter L.M. Development of AMSTAR: A measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. BMC Med. Res. Methodol. 2007;7(1):10. doi: 10.1186/1471-2288-7-10. - DOI - PMC - PubMed
    1. Shea B.J., Hamel C., Wells G.A., Bouter L.M., Kristjansson E., Grimshaw J., Henry D.A., Boers M. AMSTAR is a reliable and valid measurement tool to assess the methodological quality of systematic reviews. J. Clin. Epidemiol. 2009;62(10):1013–1020. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinepi.2008.10.009. - DOI - PubMed
    1. Salakari M.R.J., Surakka T., Nurminen R., Pylkkänen L. Effects of rehabilitation among patients with advances cancer: A systematic review. Acta Oncol. 2015;54(5):618–628. doi: 10.3109/0284186X.2014.996661. - DOI - PubMed

LinkOut - more resources