Table 3.

Differences in quality indicators within the six priorities.

What Is Working Well	What Is Not Working So Well
Priority one: Care is accessible to everyone, everywhere
78% rated quality of care excellent to good	60% reported receiving as much support as wanted before death.
84% could access care as soon as they needed.	50% felt they received enough help after their relative’s death
76% rated relief of pain excellent to good	All indicators lower for non-cancer conditions
70% for relief of symptoms other than pain and practical assistance.	All indicators lower for non-users of palliative care
80% rated quality of EOL care excellent/good and reported they received enough help at time of death (definitely/ to some extent).
Priority Two: Care is person-centred
83% rated values respected always/most of the time	58% felt they could discuss worries/fears as much as they wanted
87% rated cultural background respected always/most of the time	61% rated spiritual support as excellent/good
82% rated spiritual beliefs respected always/most of the time	64% rated emotional support as excellent/good
69% reported that the services checked if they have EOL wishes documents	All indicators lower for non-cancer conditions
78% felt their wishes were taken into account	All indicators lower for non-users of palliative care
72% of patients felt included in care decisions (excellent/good)
80% of carers reported being involved in decision making at EOL as much as they wanted
Priority Three: Care is coordinated
75% found the referral process easy/very easy	60% reported that services worked well with GP and external services
87% thought staff worked well within each setting (definitely/to some extent)	10% of ED admissions were planned or coordinated
74% rated out of hours services as excellent/good	All indicators lower for non-cancer conditions
Priority Four: Families and carers are supported
78% reported patients were involved in decisions about their EOL care as much as they wanted	62% rated emotional support to family carer as excellent/good
	60% were provided information on their relative’s condition
	47% of carers reported being able to talk about experience of illness and death to services
	53% of carers were offered information on grief by palliative care services
	42% of carers were contacted by palliative care services 3–6 weeks after death and only 16% six months after death of their relative
	All indicators lower for non-cancer conditions
	All indicators lower for non-users of palliative care
Priority Five: All staff are prepared to care
88% thought they were treated with respect/dignity always/most of the time	All indicators lower for non-cancer conditions
89% thought they were treated with compassion/ kindness always/most of the time
90% rated staff as very competent/competent
78% said they could obtain information when needed always/most of the time
86% of carers reported being dealt with in a sensitive manner at death/end of life
Priority Six: The community is aware and able to care
96% reported they received informal support before death and 92% found this informal support very/quite helpful	Lower rates of helpfulness before and after death for non-users
94% reported they received informal support after death and 87% found this informal support very/quite helpful