This section is currently under review. Please read on but visit again in a few weeks for an update.
There has been extensive evaluation of GSF at all stages, using before and after quantitative and qualitative methodology, audits and several research studies. However, there are obvious difficulties in measuring all aspects of this area of care, and some important features are difficult to measure, such as overall improvement in care, communication improvements and qualitative benefits to patients etc.
However, evaluation of GSF practices has identified some explicit outcome measures - these include increasing numbers of patients dying where they choose, more advanced care planning, better co-ordination of care and team communication and improved systemised thinking. The evaluations have also shown better codifying and measurement of palliative care issues (eg reasons for inappropriate hospital admissions) influencing commissioning for community home care. Some areas have included GSF as a Locally Enhanced Service in the GMS2 GP contract (see in Library section)
Research and evaluation of GSF will continue with Macmillan GSF Research and Evaluation Group and others, to address the issue of improving care for those nearing the end of life and the best way to use and develop GSF.
Summary of research studies / evaluations
Other evaluations available from the National GSF Centre are:
- Phase 1 Abstract - Pilot GSF Practices
- Phase 2 - Nigel King's Report from Qualitative Study
- Phase 3 - Evaluation Warwick University
- Phase 4 - Evaluation Warwick University
- Phase 5 - Evaluation Warwick University
- Phase 6 - Warwick Results
- Summary of GSF Evaluation - Dan Munday
- Phase 7 - Evaluation University of Birmingham
- Phase 8 - Evaluation University of Birmingham
- Phase 9 - Evaluation University of Birmingham
- Phase 10 - Evaluation University of Birmingham
