The use of metaphors to talk about cancer experiences has attracted much research and debate, especially in the case of military metaphors. However, questions remain about what metaphors are used by different populations for different aspects of the cancer experience. This scoping review aims to answer them. We searched PubMed, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scopus and Web of Science databases. Eligible sources include peer-reviewed scientific research published in English between 2013 and 2023, investigating patterns of metaphor use from adult populations (age ≥18) for cancer-related topics, such as cancer itself, the general experience of being ill, treatment, and people and relationships. Out of 1929 articles identified, 30 met the criteria, spanning over different populations. While most papers focused on cancer in general, some focused on specific cancer types, such as breast cancer. Both spontaneous and elicited data were collected in ten languages: mostly English (N=12), Swedish (N=3) and Arabic (N=3). The identified metaphors were subsumed under various broad categories, including particularly violence and journey. Other categories include education and non-human animate entity for the cancer itself, confinement and deprivation and cleanliness for the general experience of being ill with cancer, Poison and gardening for cancer treatment, and distance for patients' social relationships. It was found that metaphors help to identify how patients describe experiences of vulnerability and empowerment. To provide patient-centred care, clinicians and researchers should avoid blanket conclusions about helpful or unhelpful metaphors, but consider the ways in which different metaphors are used by different populations in different contexts.

Aim: To evaluate the failed implementation of the Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool Intervention for family caregivers in end-of-life care, within a trial context using Normalization Process Theory (NPT). Design: An evaluation study was conducted to learn lessons from our trial, which was not successful due to the low number of participants. The evaluation study utilized various data sources, including published data from interviews and questionnaires, and unpublished data derived from emails and conversation notes. Methods: Data were retrospectively collected. Thematic analysis was conducted guided by the NPT framework. This framework emphasizes that successful implementation of an intervention relies on its ‘normalization’, consisting of four constructs: coherence, cognitive participation, collective action and reflexive monitoring. Results: Coherence (sense making): Nurses felt the intervention could contribute to their competence in assessing family caregivers' needs, but some were unsure how it differed from usual practice. Cognitive participation (relational work): Nurse champions played a crucial role in building a community of practice. However, sustaining this community was challenging due to staff turnover and shortages. Collective action (work done to enable the intervention): Nurses felt the Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool training enabled them to improve their support of family caregivers. However, contextual factors complicated implementation, such as being used to a patient rather than a family-focused approach and a high workload. Reflexive monitoring (appraisal of the intervention): Positive experiences of the nurses with the intervention motivated them to implement it. However, the research context made nurses hesitant to recruit family caregivers because of the potential burden of participation. Conclusion: Although the intervention demonstrated potential to assist nurses in providing tailored support to family caregivers, its integration into daily practice was not optimal. Contextual factors, such as a patient-focused approach to care and the research context, hampered normalization of the intervention. Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care: Assessing and considering contextual factors that may influence implementation of a complex care intervention is needed. The NPT provided a valuable framework for evaluating the implementation process in our study. Impact: What problem did the study address? This evaluation study analysed the factors that promoted or hindered the implementation of a nursing intervention to support family caregivers in end-of-life care. What were the main findings? Both the intervention and the intervention training have potential and value for nurses in providing tailored support to family caregivers. However, the implementation faced challenges due to organizational factors and the research context, including recruitment. Where and on whom will the research have an impact? This insight is valuable for all stakeholders involved in implementing complex nursing interventions, including researchers, nurses and funders. Reporting Method: This study has adhered to the relevant EQUATOR guidelines: Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR). Patient or Public Contribution: There was no patient or public involved. Trial Registration: The trial was prospectively registered on the Dutch Trial Register (NL7702).

Aim: To evaluate the failed implementation of the Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool Intervention for family caregivers in end-of-life care, within a trial context using Normalization Process Theory (NPT). Design: An evaluation study was conducted to learn lessons from our trial, which was not successful due to the low number of participants. The evaluation study utilized various data sources, including published data from interviews and questionnaires, and unpublished data derived from emails and conversation notes. Methods: Data were retrospectively collected. Thematic analysis was conducted guided by the NPT framework. This framework emphasizes that successful implementation of an intervention relies on its ‘normalization’, consisting of four constructs: coherence, cognitive participation, collective action and reflexive monitoring. Results: Coherence (sense making): Nurses felt the intervention could contribute to their competence in assessing family caregivers' needs, but some were unsure how it differed from usual practice. Cognitive participation (relational work): Nurse champions played a crucial role in building a community of practice. However, sustaining this community was challenging due to staff turnover and shortages. Collective action (work done to enable the intervention): Nurses felt the Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool training enabled them to improve their support of family caregivers. However, contextual factors complicated implementation, such as being used to a patient rather than a family-focused approach and a high workload. Reflexive monitoring (appraisal of the intervention): Positive experiences of the nurses with the intervention motivated them to implement it. However, the research context made nurses hesitant to recruit family caregivers because of the potential burden of participation. Conclusion: Although the intervention demonstrated potential to assist nurses in providing tailored support to family caregivers, its integration into daily practice was not optimal. Contextual factors, such as a patient-focused approach to care and the research context, hampered normalization of the intervention. Implications for the Profession and/or Patient Care: Assessing and considering contextual factors that may influence implementation of a complex care intervention is needed. The NPT provided a valuable framework for evaluating the implementation process in our study. Impact: What problem did the study address? This evaluation study analysed the factors that promoted or hindered the implementation of a nursing intervention to support family caregivers in end-of-life care. What were the main findings? Both the intervention and the intervention training have potential and value for nurses in providing tailored support to family caregivers. However, the implementation faced challenges due to organizational factors and the research context, including recruitment. Where and on whom will the research have an impact? This insight is valuable for all stakeholders involved in implementing complex nursing interventions, including researchers, nurses and funders. Reporting Method: This study has adhered to the relevant EQUATOR guidelines: Standards for Reporting Qualitative Research (SRQR). Patient or Public Contribution: There was no patient or public involved. Trial Registration: The trial was prospectively registered on the Dutch Trial Register (NL7702).

INTRODUCTION: Existing advance care planning (ACP) definitional frameworks apply to individuals with decision-making capacity. We aimed to conceptualize ACP for dementia in terms of its definition and issues that deserve particular attention. METHODS: Delphi study with phases: (A) adaptation of a generic ACP framework by a task force of the European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC); (B) four online surveys by 107 experts from 33 countries, September 2021 to June 2022; (C) approval by the EAPC board. RESULTS: ACP in dementia was defined as a communication process adapted to the person's capacity, which includes, and is continued with, family if available. We identified pragmatic boundaries regarding participation and time (i.e., current or end-of-life care). Three interrelated issues that deserve particular attention were capacity, family, and engagement and communication. DISCUSSION: A communication and relationship-centered definitional framework of ACP in dementia evolved through international consensus supporting inclusiveness of persons with dementia and their family. Highlights: This article offers a consensus definitional framework of advance care planning in dementia. The definition covers all stages of capacity and includes family caregivers. Particularly important are (1) capacity, (2) family, (3) engagement, and communication. Fluctuating capacity was visualized in relation to roles and engaging stakeholders.

Treatment decision-making can be complex, notably when there are multiple treatments available, with different (probabilities of) benefits and harms, for example, survival and side effects.1 It is precisely in these complex situations that the preferences of the patient are of utmost importance, as the trade-offs of benefits and harms are subjective and concern patients' lives.2 In such trade-offs, shared decision making (SDM) has gained momentum as a strategy to include both the best available evidence and the patient's preferences.3

Background: The incidence of continuous deep sedation (CDS) has more than doubled over the last decade in The Netherlands, while reasons for this increase are not fully understood. Patients and relatives have an essential role in deciding on CDS. We hypothesize that the increase in CDS practice is related to the changing role of patients and relatives in deciding on CDS. Objective: To describe perceptions and experiences of patients and relatives with regard to CDS. This insight may help professionals and policymakers to better understand and respond to the evolving practice of CDS. Methods: Qualitative interviews were held with patients and relatives who had either personal experience with CDS as a relative or had contemplated CDS for themselves. Results: The vast majority of respondents appreciated CDS as a palliative care option, and none of the respondents reported (moral) objections to CDS. The majority of respondents prioritized avoiding suffering at the end of life. The patients and families generally considered CDS a palliative care option for which they can choose. Likewise, according to our respondents, the decision to start CDS was made by them, instead of the physician. Negative experiences with CDS care were mostly related to loss of sense of agency, due to insufficient communication or information provision by healthcare professionals. Lack of continuity of care was also a source of distress. We observed a variety in the respondents' understanding of the distinction between CDS and other end-of-life care decisions, including euthanasia. Some perceived CDS as hastening death. Conclusion: The traditional view of CDS as a last resort option for a physician to relieve a patient's suffering at the end of life is not explicit among patients and relatives. Instead, our results show that they perceive CDS as a regular palliative care option. Along with this normalization of CDS, patients and relatives claim a substantial say in the decision-making and are mainly motivated by a wish to avoid suffering and exercise control at the end of life. These distinct views on CDS of patients, their relatives and healthcare providers should be reconciled in guidelines and protocols for CDS. Patient or Public Contribution: One of the authors in our team (G. H.) has experience with CDS as a relative and ensured that the patient/relative viewpoint was adequately reflected in the design and conduct of our study. In the preliminary phase of our study, G. H. adjusted the topic list so it was better adapted to the current practice of CDS. During the data analysis, G. H. read several interviews and took part in the open and critical discussion on central themes and core concepts as an important member of the author team, thereby guaranteeing the central position of the patient/relative perspective in our final research outcome.

Objective: Family caregivers are often intensively involved in palliative and end-of-life cancer care. A variety of interventions to support family caregivers have been developed, differing in target population, modality, and components. We aimed to systematically examine characteristics and the effectiveness of interventions to support family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer. Methods: A systematic review was conducted using Embase, Medline Ovid, Web of Science, Cochrane, Google Scholar, and Cinahl. This review included quantitative studies published from January 2004 until January 2020 reporting on interventions to support family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer in all care settings. Results: Out of 7957 titles, 32 studies were included. Twenty-two studies were randomized controlled trials. Interventions were delivered to four target populations: individual family caregivers (n = 15), family caregiver-patient dyads (n = 11), families (n = 2) and peer groups (n = 4). Most interventions (n = 26) were delivered face-to-face or by phone, two were delivered online. Most interventions included multiple components and were primarily aimed at supporting family caregivers' self-care. Twenty-nine interventions were shown to have beneficial effects on family caregiver outcomes, mostly in the psycho-emotional (n = 24), daily functioning (n = 13) and social dimension (n = 6). Individual interventions were mainly effective in the psycho-emotional dimension, dyad and family interventions in the psycho-emotional and social domain, and group interventions mainly had an effect on daily functioning. Conclusions: Interventions to support family caregivers in advanced cancer care vary widely. Most intervention studies reported beneficial effects for the wellbeing of family caregivers. There is evidence that the target group is associated with beneficial effects on different outcome dimensions.

Background: Acculturation is the process of two different cultures coming into contact. It is unclear how acculturation influences Chinese immigrants’ engagement in advance care planning due to the complexity and multifaceted nature of both acculturation and advance care planning. Aims: To synthesize evidence regarding the role of Chinese immigrants’ acculturation in their engagement in advance care planning. Design: Systematic mixed-method review, registered in PROSPERO (CRD42021231822). Data sources: EMBASE, MEDLINE, Web of Science, and Google Scholar were searched for publications until January 21, 2021. Results: Twenty-one out of 1112 identified articles were included in the analysis. Of those 21 articles, 17 had a qualitative design and 13 originated from the United States. Three of four quantitative studies reported that higher acculturation levels were associated with better knowledge or higher rate of engagement in advance care planning. Analysis of qualitative studies showed that Chinese immigrants’ engagement in advance care planning was associated with their: (1) self-perceived cultural identity (native or non-native); (2) interpretation of filial piety (traditional or modern); and (3) interpretation of autonomy (individual or familial). To facilitate their engagement, Chinese immigrants prefer an implicit approach, non-family-related initiators, contextualization advance care planning in Chinese culture and using Chinese language. Conclusion: Chinese immigrants’ willingness to engage in advance care planning varied with their acculturation level. To engage them in advance care planning, we recommend adapting the introduction of advance care planning to address people’s perceptions of their cultural identity, filial piety, and autonomy, as well as their preference for certain approach, initiator, context, and language.

Objectives: The care needs of patients with advanced cancer and their relatives change throughout the disease trajectory. This study focused on the care-related problems and needs of patients with advanced cancer and their relatives. This was done from the perspective of centres for information and support. Methods: This cross-sectional study used data from the eQuiPe study: an observational cohort study in which 40 Dutch hospitals participated. All adult patients with a diagnosis of a metastasised tumour and their relatives were eligible. Measures included information on the patients' and relatives' care problems and needs, assessed by the short version of the Problems and Needs in Palliative Care questionnaire. Socioeconomic demographics were also collected. Results: 1103 patients with advanced cancer and 831 relatives were included. Both patients (M=60.3, SD=29.0) and relatives (M=59.2, SD=26.6) experienced most problems in the domain of â € psychological issues'. Both patients (M=14.0, SD=24.2) and relatives (M=17.7, SD=25.7) most frequently reported unmet needs within this domain. The most often reported unmet need by patients was â € worrying about the future of my loved ones' (22.0%); for relatives this was â € fear for physical suffering of the patient' (32.8%). There was no clear relationship between socioeconomic demographics and the experienced unmet needs. Conclusions: The most often mentioned unmet needs consisted of fears and worries, followed by a broad range of topics within multiple domains. Centres for information and support may play a role in reducing the unmet needs of (potential) visitors as these centres provide support on a broad range of topics.