Advancing the science of hospice care: Coalition of Hospices Organized to Investigate Comparative Effectiveness

David J. Casarett, Joan Harrold, Betty Oldanie, Maryjo Prince-Paul, Joan Teno

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

16 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose of review There is very little high-quality evidence to guide clinical practice in hospice care. In the areas of medical therapy, patient-centered and family-centered outcomes, and patient safety, there are numerous high-impact questions for which answers are needed. Although randomized controlled trials are the gold standard for research, such trials are difficult, time consuming, and expensive to conduct in a hospice population. Moreover, they cannot examine the implementation of therapies in real-world settings. Therefore, there is a need for novel, complementary approaches to research in this unique population. Recent findings This article describes the initial experience of the Coalition of Hospices Organized to Investigate Comparative Effectiveness (CHOICE). CHOICE is a national network of hospices that use electronic health record-based data collection procedures to answer key questions relevant to clinical care and policy. By using a rich source of existing data to conduct observational studies, CHOICE is able to overcome many of the most significant challenges of randomized controlled trials in hospice. However, this approach also created unique challenges related to governance and privacy concerns. Summary CHOICE is a growing research network that has the potential to make a contribution to the science of palliative care in a hospice population.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)459-464
Number of pages6
JournalCurrent opinion in supportive and palliative care
Volume6
Issue number4
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 1 2012
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Hospice Care
Hospices
Randomized Controlled Trials
Research
Population
Electronic Health Records
Privacy
Information Storage and Retrieval
Patient Safety
Palliative Care
Observational Studies
Therapeutics

Keywords

  • Comparative effectiveness research
  • Hospice
  • Palliative care

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology
  • Oncology(nursing)
  • Critical Care and Intensive Care Medicine

Cite this

Advancing the science of hospice care : Coalition of Hospices Organized to Investigate Comparative Effectiveness. / Casarett, David J.; Harrold, Joan; Oldanie, Betty; Prince-Paul, Maryjo; Teno, Joan.

In: Current opinion in supportive and palliative care, Vol. 6, No. 4, 01.12.2012, p. 459-464.

Research output: Contribution to journalReview article

Casarett, David J. ; Harrold, Joan ; Oldanie, Betty ; Prince-Paul, Maryjo ; Teno, Joan. / Advancing the science of hospice care : Coalition of Hospices Organized to Investigate Comparative Effectiveness. In: Current opinion in supportive and palliative care. 2012 ; Vol. 6, No. 4. pp. 459-464.
@article{42c044186ccc40b9a169aaaf7e044900,
title = "Advancing the science of hospice care: Coalition of Hospices Organized to Investigate Comparative Effectiveness",
abstract = "Purpose of review There is very little high-quality evidence to guide clinical practice in hospice care. In the areas of medical therapy, patient-centered and family-centered outcomes, and patient safety, there are numerous high-impact questions for which answers are needed. Although randomized controlled trials are the gold standard for research, such trials are difficult, time consuming, and expensive to conduct in a hospice population. Moreover, they cannot examine the implementation of therapies in real-world settings. Therefore, there is a need for novel, complementary approaches to research in this unique population. Recent findings This article describes the initial experience of the Coalition of Hospices Organized to Investigate Comparative Effectiveness (CHOICE). CHOICE is a national network of hospices that use electronic health record-based data collection procedures to answer key questions relevant to clinical care and policy. By using a rich source of existing data to conduct observational studies, CHOICE is able to overcome many of the most significant challenges of randomized controlled trials in hospice. However, this approach also created unique challenges related to governance and privacy concerns. Summary CHOICE is a growing research network that has the potential to make a contribution to the science of palliative care in a hospice population.",
keywords = "Comparative effectiveness research, Hospice, Palliative care",
author = "Casarett, {David J.} and Joan Harrold and Betty Oldanie and Maryjo Prince-Paul and Joan Teno",
year = "2012",
month = "12",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1097/SPC.0b013e32835a66b7",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "6",
pages = "459--464",
journal = "Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care",
issn = "1751-4258",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "4",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Advancing the science of hospice care

T2 - Coalition of Hospices Organized to Investigate Comparative Effectiveness

AU - Casarett, David J.

AU - Harrold, Joan

AU - Oldanie, Betty

AU - Prince-Paul, Maryjo

AU - Teno, Joan

PY - 2012/12/1

Y1 - 2012/12/1

N2 - Purpose of review There is very little high-quality evidence to guide clinical practice in hospice care. In the areas of medical therapy, patient-centered and family-centered outcomes, and patient safety, there are numerous high-impact questions for which answers are needed. Although randomized controlled trials are the gold standard for research, such trials are difficult, time consuming, and expensive to conduct in a hospice population. Moreover, they cannot examine the implementation of therapies in real-world settings. Therefore, there is a need for novel, complementary approaches to research in this unique population. Recent findings This article describes the initial experience of the Coalition of Hospices Organized to Investigate Comparative Effectiveness (CHOICE). CHOICE is a national network of hospices that use electronic health record-based data collection procedures to answer key questions relevant to clinical care and policy. By using a rich source of existing data to conduct observational studies, CHOICE is able to overcome many of the most significant challenges of randomized controlled trials in hospice. However, this approach also created unique challenges related to governance and privacy concerns. Summary CHOICE is a growing research network that has the potential to make a contribution to the science of palliative care in a hospice population.

AB - Purpose of review There is very little high-quality evidence to guide clinical practice in hospice care. In the areas of medical therapy, patient-centered and family-centered outcomes, and patient safety, there are numerous high-impact questions for which answers are needed. Although randomized controlled trials are the gold standard for research, such trials are difficult, time consuming, and expensive to conduct in a hospice population. Moreover, they cannot examine the implementation of therapies in real-world settings. Therefore, there is a need for novel, complementary approaches to research in this unique population. Recent findings This article describes the initial experience of the Coalition of Hospices Organized to Investigate Comparative Effectiveness (CHOICE). CHOICE is a national network of hospices that use electronic health record-based data collection procedures to answer key questions relevant to clinical care and policy. By using a rich source of existing data to conduct observational studies, CHOICE is able to overcome many of the most significant challenges of randomized controlled trials in hospice. However, this approach also created unique challenges related to governance and privacy concerns. Summary CHOICE is a growing research network that has the potential to make a contribution to the science of palliative care in a hospice population.

KW - Comparative effectiveness research

KW - Hospice

KW - Palliative care

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84871205750&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84871205750&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/SPC.0b013e32835a66b7

DO - 10.1097/SPC.0b013e32835a66b7

M3 - Review article

C2 - 23108341

AN - SCOPUS:84871205750

VL - 6

SP - 459

EP - 464

JO - Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care

JF - Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care

SN - 1751-4258

IS - 4

ER -