The purpose was to describe the physical, psychological, social, and spiritual needs of patients with non-cancer serious illness diagnoses compared to those of patients with cancer.

We conducted a retrospective chart review of all patients with a non-cancer diagnosis admitted to a tertiary palliative care unit between January 2008 and December 2017 and compared their needs to those of a matched cohort of patients with cancer diagnoses. The prevalence of needs within the following four main concerns was recorded and the data analyzed using descriptive statistics and content analysis:

• • Physical: pain, dyspnea, fatigue, anorexia, edema, and delirium

• • Psychological: depression, anxiety, prognosis, and dignity

• • Social: caregiver burden, isolation, and financial

• • Spiritual: spiritual distress

The prevalence of the four main concerns was similar among patients with non-cancer and cancer diagnoses. Pain, nausea/vomiting, fatigue, and anorexia were more prevalent among patients with cancer. Dyspnea was more commonly the primary concern in patients with non-cancer diagnoses (39%), who also had a higher prevalence of anxiety and concerns about dignity. Spirituality was addressed more often in patients with cancer.

The majority of patients admitted to tertiary palliative care settings have historically been those with cancer. The tertiary palliative care needs of patients with non-cancer diagnoses have not been well described, despite the increasing prevalence of this population. Our description of the palliative care needs of patients with non-cancer diagnoses will help guide future palliative care for the increasing population of patients with non-cancer serious illness diagnoses.

1. To determine the awareness of the literature concerning therapeutic manoeuvres in severe closed head injury (CHI) among Canadian critical care clinicians and neurosurgeons, 2. To identify factors that affect utilization of these manoeuvres, and 3. To compare reported appropriateness and frequency of use with #1 and #2.

The study design was a systematic scenario-based survey of all neurosurgeons and critical care physicians treating patients with severe CHI in Canada.

Fifty-nine of 99 neurosurgeons and 82 of 148 critical care physicians responded (57%). The majority of respondents were not able to identify the highest level of published evidence for most manoeuvres, except for the avoidance of corticosteroids (51%). The factor identified by most respondents as being most important in motivating use of any given manoeuvres was the level of published evidence (25%). Although reported appropriateness and frequency of use of most manoeuvres correlated well with each other, they did not correlate with awareness of evidence. In the case of corticosteroids, there was a strong correlation between non-use of steroids and awareness of evidence (R = - 0.30, p = 0.0003).

Respondents to this survey of Canadian physicians treating patients with severe head injury reported published evidence as being the most significant factor affecting use of a therapy. However, most respondents did not correctly identify the highest published level of evidence for most therapies. This study has identified difficulty with research translation that may have clinical implications.