Dataset Information

Laxatives for the management of constipation in people receiving palliative care.

ABSTRACT:

Background

This article describes the second update of a Cochrane review on the effectiveness of laxatives for the management of constipation in people receiving palliative care. Previous versions were published in 2006 and 2010 where we also evaluated trials of methylnaltrexone; these trials have been removed as they are included in another review in press. In these earlier versions, we drew no conclusions on individual effectiveness of different laxatives because of the limited number of evaluations. This is despite constipation being common in palliative care, generating considerable suffering due to the unpleasant physical symptoms and the availability of a wide range of laxatives with known differences in effect in other populations.

Objectives

To determine the effectiveness and differential efficacy of laxatives used to manage constipation in people receiving palliative care.

Search methods

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; The Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and Web of Science (SCI & CPCI-S) for trials to September 2014.

Selection criteria

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating laxatives for constipation in people receiving palliative care.

Data collection and analysis

Two authors assessed trial quality and extracted data. The appropriateness of combining data from the studies depended upon clinical and outcome measure homogeneity.

Main results

We identified five studies involving the laxatives lactulose, senna, co-danthramer, misrakasneham, docusate and magnesium hydroxide with liquid paraffin. Overall, the study findings were at an unclear risk of bias. As all five studies compared different laxatives or combinations of laxatives, it was not possible to perform a meta-analysis. There was no evidence on whether individual laxatives were more effective than others or caused fewer adverse effects.

Authors' conclusions

This second update found that laxatives were of similar effectiveness but the evidence remains limited due to insufficient data from a few small RCTs. None of the studies evaluated polyethylene glycol or any intervention given rectally. There is a need for more trials to evaluate the effectiveness of laxatives in palliative care populations. Extrapolating findings on the effectiveness of laxatives evaluated in other populations should proceed with caution. This is because of the differences inherent in people receiving palliative care that may impact, in a likely negative way, on the effect of a laxative.

SUBMITTER: Candy B

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6956627 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundConstipation is a common symptom for patients receiving palliative care. Whilst international clinical guidelines are available on the clinical management of constipation for people with advanced cancer receiving specialist palliative care (SPC), the extent to which the guidelines are implemented in practice is unclear. This study aimed to examine clinical practices for the assessment and management of constipation for patients with advanced cancer within inpatient SPC settings.MethodsA multi-site retrospective case-note review was conducted, consisting of 150 patient case-notes from three inpatient SPC units across the United Kingdom between August 2016 and May 2017. The variables selected for review were determined by the recommendations within the clinical guidelines. Descriptive statistics, cross tabulation, chi square, and bivariate correlations were used to examine clinical practices compared to policy guidelines for the assessment and management of constipation. Reporting was structured by the STROBE checklist for observational research (Additional File 2).ResultsA comprehensive assessment, including a full history and performing a physical exam, was recorded for 109 patients (73%), however, no standardised documentation was utilised. Assessment was nurse led, with variable involvement across sites of other members of the multidisciplinary team (MDT). Education on prevention was documented in 30 (20%) case-notes, and 53% recorded evidence of non-pharmacological intervention. Age, gender, and reason for admission did not impact on the likelihood of receiving a comprehensive assessment, education, or non-pharmacological intervention, however, significant differences were evident between sites. Pharmacological management was well developed and aligned to the guidelines however, 33% of patient case-notes recorded no information on the titration of laxatives. Twelve percent of patients experienced partial or complete bowel obstruction, and management strategies were variable.ConclusionsConstipation management is driven by a pharmacological approach, with little evidence of the implementation of preventative and non-pharmacological strategies. The nurse plays a key coordinating role in assessment; however, involvement and roles of the wider MDT varies. Accurate recording of care is essential when examining clinical practice and identifying areas for improvement. Further education is needed to equip HCPs with the knowledge and skills to ensure consistency in assessment and implementation of appropriate non-pharmacological/ preventative strategies.

Project description:BACKGROUND:People with advanced cancer experience multiple symptoms during their illness trajectory, which can fluctuate in intensity. AIM:To describe the course of self-reported quality of life, emotional functioning, physical functioning and symptom intensity over time in cancer patients receiving palliative care. DESIGN:Longitudinal study with monthly assessments, using the EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL. Data were analysed (1) prospectively, from baseline to ?8-month follow-up; and (2) retrospectively, by taking death as index date and comparing results from three cross-sectional subsamples at different stages of illness (time to death ?6, 5-3 and 2-0 months). Linear mixed models were calculated. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS:A total of 1739 patients (mean age 66, 50% male) from 30 palliative care centers in 12 countries were included. RESULTS:In prospective analyses, quality of life, functioning and symptoms-except nausea/vomiting-remained generally stable over time. In retrospective analyses, patients 2-0 months before death reported significantly lower quality of life and physical functioning scores than those 5-3 months before death, who in turn scored lower than those ?6 months before death, suggesting progressive decline. Emotional functioning remained initially unchanged, but decreased in the last months. Pain, fatigue and appetite loss showed a stable increase in intensity towards death. Dyspnea, insomnia and constipation increased from 5-3 to 2-0 months before death. Nausea/vomiting only increased when comparing those ?6 months before death with those 2-0 months before death. CONCLUSION:While the prospective approach showed predominantly stable patterns for quality of life, functioning and symptom severity throughout study duration, retrospective analyses indicated that deterioration was already apparent before the terminal phase and accelerated close to death. Our findings support the importance of early symptom identification and treatment in this population, and highlight the need for further studies to explore what characterizes those with either lower or higher symptom burden at different time points towards death.

Project description:BackgroundThe care of palliative patients takes place as non-specialized and specialized care, in outpatient and inpatient settings. However, palliative care is largely provided as General Outpatient Palliative Care (GOPC). This study aimed to investigate whether the survival curves of GOPC patients differed from those of the more intensive palliative care modalities and whether GOPC palliative care was appropriate in terms of timing.MethodsThe study is based on claims data from a large statutory health insurance. The analysis included 4177 patients who received palliative care starting in 2015 and who were fully insured 1 year before and 1 year after palliative care or until death. The probability of survival was observed for 12 months. Patients were classified into group A, which consisted of patients who received palliative care only with GOPC, and group B including patients who received inpatient or specialized outpatient palliative care. Group A was further divided into two subgroups. Patients who received GOPC on only 1 day were assigned to subgroup A1, and patients who received GOPC on two or more days were assigned to subgroup A2. The survival analysis was carried out using Kaplan-Meier curves. The median survival times were compared with the log-rank test.ResultsThe survival curves differed between groups A and B, except in the first quartile of the survival distribution. The median survival was significantly longer in group A (137 days, n = 2763) than in group B (47 days, n = 1424, p < 0.0001) and shorter in group A1 (35 days, n = 986) than in group A2 (217 days, n = 1767, p < 0.0001). The survival rate during the 12-month follow-up was higher in group A (42%) than in group B (11%) and lower in group A1 (38%) than in group A2 (44%).ConclusionsThe results of the analysis revealed that patients who received the first palliative care shortly before death suspected insufficient care, especially patients who received GOPC for only 1 day and no further palliative care until death or 12-month follow-up. Palliative care should start as early as necessary and be continuous until the end of life.

Project description:BackgroundPrimary health care providers play a dominant role in the provision of palliative care (PC) in Australia but many gaps in after hours service remain. In some rural areas only 19% of people receiving palliative care achieve their goal of dying at home. This study, which builds on an earlier qualitative phase of the project, investigates the gaps in care from the perspective of general practitioners (GPs) and PC nurses.MethodsQuestionnaires, developed from the outcomes of the earlier phase, and containing both structured and open ended questions, were distributed through Divisions of General Practice (1 urban, 1 rural, 1 mixed) to GPs (n = 524) and through a special interest group to palliative care nurses (n = 122) in both rural and urban areas.ResultsQuestionnaires were returned by 114 GPs (22%) and 52 nurses (43%). The majority of GPs were associated with a practice which provided some after hours services but PC was not a strong focus for most. This was reflected in low levels of PC training, limited awareness of the existence of after hours triage services in their area, and of the availability of Enhanced Primary Care (EPC) Medicare items for care planning for palliative patients. However, more than half of both nurses and GPs were aware of accessible PC resources.Factors such as poor communication and limited availability of after hours services were identified the as most likely to impact negatively on service provision. Strategies considered most likely to improve after hours services were individual patient protocols, palliative care trained respite carers and regular multidisciplinary meetings that included the GP.ConclusionWhile some of the identified gaps can only be met by long term funding and policy change, educational tools for use in training programs in PC for health professionals, which focus on the utilisation of EPC Medicare items in palliative care planning, the development of advance care plans and good communication between members of multidisciplinary teams, which include the GP, may enhance after hours service provision for patients receiving palliative care at home. The role of locums in after PC is an area for further research.