The winding down and withdrawal of the Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP) following the Neuberger Report has been met with mixed reviews. It appears that responsibility for failures of clinical care has been laid at the feet of a care pathway rather than the practitioners who used it, a rather curious outcome given that the LCP was primarily a system of documentation, a tool with no intrinsic therapeutic properties. The Neuberger inquiry was the result of persistent and repeated reports of poor-quality end-of-life care associated with the use of the LCP. There were indeed problems with the LCP regarding the process of diagnosing dying and its approach to supportive care, particularly artificial nutrition and hydration. Some of the problems were the product of personal or professional ideology influencing goals of care rather than patient-centred considerations. These problems were not insurmountable, however, and were being addressed by the organisation responsible for the LCP. With the removal of the LCP, we are left with no bench mark for end-of-life care, only aspirational goals for individualised care plans. It seems unlikely that practitioners who could not provide appropriate care with the LCP will do so without it.
- Care of the Dying Patient
- Clinical Ethics
- End of Life Care
Statistics from Altmetric.com
If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.
- End of life
- End of life
- End of life
- The concise argument
Read the full text or download the PDF:
Other content recommended for you
- Artificial nutrition and hydration in the patient with advanced dementia: is withholding treatment compatible with traditional Judaism?
- Artificial nutrition and hydration for children and young people towards end of life: consensus guidelines across four specialist paediatric palliative care centres
- Precedent autonomy should be respected in life-sustaining treatment decisions
- Withdrawal of artificial nutrition and hydration in the Neonatal Intensive Care Unit: parental perspectives
- Withdrawing artificial nutrition and hydration from minimally conscious and vegetative patients: family perspectives
- Barriers and facilitators to implementation of the Liverpool Care Pathway in the Netherlands: a qualitative study
- Factors affecting the successful implementation and sustainability of the Liverpool Care Pathway for dying patients: a realist evaluation
- Assessing the uptake of the Liverpool Care Pathway for dying patients: a systematic review
- Patient challenges GMC guidance on withdrawing treatment
- Translation and cross-cultural adaptation of a family booklet on comfort care in dementia: sensitive topics revised before implementation