Dataset Information

Randomised controlled trial of a new palliative care service: Compliance, recruitment and completeness of follow-up.

ABSTRACT: Palliative care has been proposed for progressive non-cancer conditions but there have been few evaluations of service developments. We analysed recruitment, compliance and follow-up data of a fast track (or wait list control) randomised controlled trial of a new palliative care service - a design not previously used to assess palliative care.An innovative palliative care service (comprising a consultant in palliative medicine, a clinical nurse specialist, an administrator and a psychosocial worker) was delivered to people severely affected by multiple sclerosis (MS), and their carers, in southeast London. Our design followed the MRC Framework for the Evaluation of Complex Interventions. In phase II we conducted randomised controlled trial, of immediate referral to the service (fast-track) versus a 12-week wait (standard best practice). Main outcome measures were: compliance (the extent the trial protocol was adhered to), recruitment (target 50 patients), attrition and missing data rates; trial outcomes were Palliative Care Outcome Scale and MS Impact Scale.69 patients were referred, 52 entered the trial (26 randomised to each arm), 5 refused consent and 12 were excluded from the trial for other reasons, usually illness or urgent needs, achieving our target numbers. 25/26 fast track and 21/26 standard best practice patients completed the trial, resulting in 217/225 (96%) of possible interviews completed, 87% of which took place in the patient's home. Main reasons for failure to interview and/or attrition were death or illness. There were three deaths in the standard best practice group and one in the fast-track group during the trial. At baseline there were no differences between groups. Missing data for individual questionnaire items were small (median 0, mean 1-5 items out of 56+ items per interview), not associated with any patient or carer characteristics or with individual questionnaires, but were associated with interviewer.This is the first time a fast track (or wait list) randomised trial has been reported in palliative care. We found it achieved good recruitment and is a feasible method to evaluate palliative care services when patients are expected to live longer than 3-6 months. Home interviews are needed for a trial of this kind; interviewers need careful recruitment, training and supervision; and there should be careful separation from the clinical service of the control patients to prevent accidental contamination.Clinical Trials.Gov NCT00364963.

SUBMITTER: Higginson IJ

PROVIDER: S-EPMC2442830 | biostudies-literature | 2008 May

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Randomised controlled trial of a new palliative care service: Compliance, recruitment and completeness of follow-up.

Higginson Irene J IJ Hart Sam S Burman Rachel R Silber Eli E Saleem Tariq T Edmonds Polly P

BMC palliative care 20080528

<h4>Background</h4>Palliative care has been proposed for progressive non-cancer conditions but there have been few evaluations of service developments. We analysed recruitment, compliance and follow-up data of a fast track (or wait list control) randomised controlled trial of a new palliative care service - a design not previously used to assess palliative care.<h4>Methods/design</h4>An innovative palliative care service (comprising a consultant in palliative medicine, a clinical nurse specialis ...[more]

PMID: 18507817

Similar Datasets

Project description:INTRODUCTION:In outcome research, incomplete follow-up is a major, yet potentially correctable source of bias. Cross-sectional surveys may theoretically increase completeness of follow-up, but low response rates are reported typically. We investigated whether a pre-notification letter improved patient availability for follow-up phone interviews and thereby improved cross-sectional survey yield. METHODS:A consecutive series of vascular patients was randomly divided into a trial and a validation population. The trial population was then randomized 1:1 to one of two cross-sectional contact strategies: Strategy 1 consisted of direct contact attempts by up to 12 systematically timed phone calls, whereas Strategy 2 used a personalized pre-notification letter to arrange for scheduled phone call interviews. Response rates, average time and efforts needed per patient and overall survey duration were compared. Subsequently, trial findings were externally validated in the validation population. RESULTS:Of 728 consecutive patients, 370 were allocated to the trial population. Trial patients contacted by strategy 1 (n = 183) had a similar profile when compared to trial patients contacted by strategy 2 (n = 187). Follow-up periods following surgery (54.3 versus 53.6 months) and all-cause mortality rates (21.3% versus 18.7%) were comparable between the trial groups. Cross-sectional information on survival outcomes was almost complete after both contact strategies (99.5% versus 98.9%, P = 1.0). In 144/187 strategy 2 patients (77%) interviews were scheduled successfully necessitating significantly less contact attempts (median of 1.3 versus 2.3 per patient, P<0.0001). However, invested time per patient was similar between the groups (median of 10.1 versus 9.6 minutes), and survey strategy 1 completed earlier (median time to contact 4 versus 11 days, P<0.0001). Therefore, strategy 1 was validated in the validation population (n = 358): a low lost to follow-up rate below 1% (P = 1.0) was reconfirmed necessitating an average of 2.3 contact attempts per patient. CONCLUSIONS:Both contact strategies were equally successful in contacting almost all patients cross-sectionally. If systematically timed, direct phone calls were less complicated to organize and faster completed. Given the low time and effort per patient, outcome studies should invest in systematic follow-up surveys to minimize attrition bias.

Project description:There are no universally accepted guidelines for the follow-up of individuals with cutaneous melanoma. Furthermore, to date, there have been no randomised controlled trials of different models of melanoma follow-up care. This randomised controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the effects of GP-led melanoma follow-up on patient satisfaction, follow-up guideline compliance, anxiety and depression, as well as health status.A randomised controlled trial of GP-led follow-up of cutaneous melanoma was conducted over a period of 1 year with assessment by self-completed questionnaires and review of general practice-held medical records at baseline and 12 months later. It took place in 35 general practices in North-east Scotland. Subjects were 142 individuals (51.4% women 48.6% men; mean (s.d.) age 59.2 (15.2) years previously treated for cutaneous melanoma and free of recurrent disease. The intervention consisted of protocol-driven melanoma reviews in primary care, conducted by trained GPs and supported by centralised recall, rapid access pathway to secondary care and a patient information booklet. The main outcome measure was patient satisfaction measured by questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were adherence to guidelines, health status measured by Short Form-36 and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale.There were significant improvements in 5 out of 15 aspects of patient satisfaction during the study year in those receiving GP-led melanoma follow-up (all P<or=0.01). The intervention group was significantly more satisfied with 7 out of 15 aspects of care at follow-up after adjustment for potential confounders. There was significantly greater adherence to guidelines in the intervention group during the study year. There was no significant difference in health status or anxiety and depression between intervention and control groups at either baseline or outcome.GP-led follow-up is feasible, engenders greater satisfaction in those patients who receive it, permits closer adherence to guidelines and does not result in adverse effects on health status or anxiety and depression when compared with traditional hospital-based follow-up for melanoma.

Project description:BackgroundSCORE is the first randomised controlled trial (RCT) to examine shared oncologist and general practitioner (GP) follow-up for survivors of colorectal cancer (CRC). SCORE aimed to show that shared care (SC) was non-inferior to usual care (UC) on the EORTC QLQ-C30 Global Health Status/Quality of Life (GHQ-QoL) scale to 12 months.MethodsThe study recruited patients from five public hospitals in Melbourne, Australia between February 2017 and May 2021. Patients post curative intent treatment for stage I-III CRC underwent 1:1 randomisation to SC and UC. SC replaced two oncologist visits with GP visits and included a survivorship care plan and primary care management guidelines. Assessments were at baseline, 6 and 12 months. Difference between groups on GHQ-QoL to 12 months was estimated from a mixed model for repeated measures (MMRM), with a non-inferiority margin (NIM) of -10 points. Secondary endpoints included quality of life (QoL); patient perceptions of care; costs and clinical care processes (CEA tests, recurrences). Registration ACTRN12617000004369p.Findings150 consenting patients were randomised to SC (N = 74) or UC (N = 76); 11 GPs declined. The mean (SD) GHQ-QoL scores at 12 months were 72 (20.2) for SC versus 73 (17.2) for UC. The MMRM mean estimate of GHQ-QoL across the 6 month and 12 month follow-up was 69 for SC and 73 for UC, mean difference -4.0 (95% CI: -9.0 to 0.9). The lower limit of the 95% CI did not cross the NIM. There was no clear evidence of differences on other QoL, unmet needs or satisfaction scales. At 12 months, the majority preferred SC (40/63; 63%) in the SC group, with equal preference for SC (22/62; 35%) and specialist care (22/62; 35%) in UC group. CEA completion was higher in SC. Recurrences similar between arms. Patients in SC on average incurred USD314 less in health costs versus UC patients.InterpretationSC seems to be an appropriate and cost-effective model of follow-up for CRC survivors.FundingVictorian Cancer Agency and Cancer Australia.

Project description:PurposeThe aim of this study was to determine if there were any differences in health-related outcomes and physical activity (PA) between the two OptiTrain exercise groups and usual care (UC), 2 years post-baseline.MethodsThe OptiTrain study was a three-arm randomised controlled trial comparing 16 weeks of concurrent aerobic high-intensity interval training (HIIT) and progressive resistance exercise (RT-HIIT) or concurrent HIIT and continuous moderate-intensity aerobic exercise (AT-HIIT) to UC in 206 patients with breast cancer undergoing chemotherapy. Eligible participants were approached 2 years following baseline to assess cancer-related fatigue, quality of life, symptoms, muscle strength, cardiorespiratory fitness, body mass, PA, sedentary behaviour, and sick leave.ResultsThe RT-HIIT group reported lower total cancer-related fatigue, (- 1.37, 95% CI - 2.70, - 0.04, ES = - 0.06) and cognitive cancer-related fatigue (- 1.47, 95% CI - 2.75, - 0.18, ES = - 0.28), and had higher lower limb muscle strength (12.09, 95% CI 3.77, 20.40, ES = 0.52) than UC at 2 years. The AT-HIIT group reported lower total symptoms (- 0.23, 95% CI - 0.42, - 0.03, ES = - 0.15), symptom burden (- 0.30, 95% CI - 0.60, - 0.01, ES = - 0.19), and body mass - 2.15 (- 3.71, - 0.60, ES = - 0.28) than UC at 2 years.ConclusionAt 2 years, the exercise groups were generally experiencing positive differences in cancer-related fatigue (RT-HIIT), symptoms (AT-HIIT), and muscle strength (RT-HIIT) to UC. The findings provide novel evidence that being involved in an exercise program during chemotherapy can have long-term benefits for women with breast cancer, but that strategies are needed to create better pathways to support patients to maintain physical activity levels.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov registration number: NCT02522260. Trial registered on 9 June 2015. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02522260 . Retrospectively registered.

Dataset Information

Randomised controlled trial of a new palliative care service: Compliance, recruitment and completeness of follow-up.

Publications

Randomised controlled trial of a new palliative care service: Compliance, recruitment and completeness of follow-up.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets