Download PDFPDF
Improving the use of treatment escalation plans: a quality-improvement study
Compose Response

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Author Information
First or given name, e.g. 'Peter'.
Your last, or family, name, e.g. 'MacMoody'.
Your email address, e.g.
Your role and/or occupation, e.g. 'Orthopedic Surgeon'.
Your organization or institution (if applicable), e.g. 'Royal Free Hospital'.
Statement of Competing Interests


  • Responses are moderated before posting and publication is at the absolute discretion of BMJ, however they are not peer-reviewed
  • Once published, you will not have the right to remove or edit your response. Removal or editing of responses is at BMJ's absolute discretion
  • If patients could recognise themselves, or anyone else could recognise a patient from your description, please obtain the patient's written consent to publication and send them to the editorial office before submitting your response [Patient consent forms]
  • By submitting this response you are agreeing to our full [Response terms and requirements]

Vertical Tabs

Other responses

Jump to comment:

  • Published on:
    Choice of words is crucial in effective communication
    • Claud Regnard, Honorary Consultant in Palliative Care Medicine St. Oswald’s Hospice, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE3 1EE

    Improving communication in decision-making is a worthy goal and the choice of words is crucial. Sayma and colleagues (1) have not considered the implications of some of their choices.

    Firstly, throughout the article they have used the word ‘advanced’ when describing decisions and care plans. This is a common misspelling but such issues are not superior formats but are care plans and decisions made in advance. Secondly, the authors mention ‘ceilings of care’ but do not explain that there are no ethical or legal permissions that allow care to be limited. This term is often misused when what is meant is a limit to treatment options. Finally the use of ‘escalation’ in care plans has been shown to be threatening to patients.(2) The term is too often used by clinicians without considering how this might be considered by patients.

    None of this should not detract from the value of the information provided during the study, but perhaps the authors will think carefully in future about their choice of words.

    Claud Regnard

    1. Sayma M et al. Improving the use of treatment escalation plans: a quality improvement study. Postgrad Med J, 2018; doi: 10.1136/postgradmedj-2018-135699.
    2. Fritz Z, Fudd JP. Development of the Universal Form of Treatment Options (UFTO) as an alternative to Do Not Attempt Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation (DNACPR) orders: a cross disciplinary approach. J Evaluation in Clinical Practice 2014; 21: 109-117.

    Conflict of Interest:
    None declared.