Liverpool Care Pathway: life-ending pathway or palliative care pathway?
Wrigley disagreed with the decision to phase out the Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP) from clinical practice in end-of-life care of terminally ill and dying patients in England.1 The decision was made by the Department of Health based on the recommendation of an independent review by Neuberger.2 In his...
| Authors: | ; |
|---|---|
| Format: | Electronic Article |
| Language: | English |
| Check availability: | HBZ Gateway |
| Journals Online & Print: | Drawer...
|
| Fernleihe: | Fernleihe für die Fachinformationsdienste |
| Published: |
BMJ Publ.
2015
|
| In: |
Journal of medical ethics
Year: 2015, Volume: 41, Issue: 8, Pages: 644 |
| Online Access: |
Volltext (JSTOR) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) Volltext (lizenzpflichtig) |
| Summary: | Wrigley disagreed with the decision to phase out the Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP) from clinical practice in end-of-life care of terminally ill and dying patients in England.1 The decision was made by the Department of Health based on the recommendation of an independent review by Neuberger.2 In his analysis, Wrigley outlined some of the potential harms to patients from indiscriminately applying the LCP in clinical practice. The Neuberger Review outlined some of the fatal flaws in the LCP: (1) life-ending decisions were made in patients who might not have been imminently dying; (2) basic medical care was withheld or withdrawn (including nutrition and hydration) early in the end-of-life trajectory; and (3) pharmacological means of symptom control were … |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 1473-4257 |
| Contains: | Enthalten in: Journal of medical ethics
|
| Persistent identifiers: | DOI: 10.1136/medethics-2014-102314 |