Dataset Information

A cluster randomised trial of a Needs Assessment Tool for adult Cancer patients and their carers (NAT-C) in primary care: A feasibility study.

ABSTRACT:

Background

People with cancer often have unidentified symptoms and social care needs. The Needs Assessment Tool-Cancer (NAT-C) is a validated, structured method of assessing patient/carer concerns and prompting action, to address unmet need.

Aims

Assess feasibility and acceptability of a definitive two-armed cluster randomised trial of NAT-C in primary care by evaluating: recruitment of GP practices, patients and carers; most effective approach of ensuring NAT-C appointments, acceptability of study measures and follow-up.

Methods

Non-blinded, feasibility study in four General Practices, with cluster randomisation to method of NAT-C appointment delivery, and process evaluation. Adults with active cancer were invited to participate with or without carer. Practices cluster randomised (1:1) to Arm I: promotion and use of NAT-C with a NAT-C trained clinician or Arm II: clinician of choice irrespective of training status. Participants completed study questionnaires at: baseline, 1, 3 and 6 months. Patients booked a 20?minute needs-assessment appointment post-baseline. Patients, carers and GP practice staff views regarding the study sought through interviews/focus groups. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively. Qualitative data were analysed thematically, informed by Normalisation Process Theory. Progression to a definitive trial was assessed against feasibility outcomes, relating to: recruitment rate, uptake and delivery of the NAT-C, data collection and quality.

Results

Five GP practices approached, four recruited and trained to use the NAT-C. Forty-seven participants and 17 carers recruited. At baseline, 34/47 (72%) participants reported at least one moderate-severe unmet need, confirming study rationale. 32/47 (68%) participants received a NAT-C-guided consultation, 19 of which on Arm I. Study attrition at one month (n = 44 (94%), n = 16 (94%)), three months (n = 38 (81%), n = 14 (82%)) and six months (n = 32 (68%), n = 10 (59%)). Fifteen patient interviews conducted across the whole study and one focus group at each GP practice. Participants supported a definitive study and found measures acceptable.

Conclusion

The feasibility trial indicated that recruitment rate, intervention uptake and data collection were appropriate, with refinements, for a definitive multi-centre cluster randomised controlled trial. Feasibility outcomes informed the design of a 2-armed cluster randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the NAT-C compared with usual care.

SUBMITTER: Clark J

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7842977 | biostudies-literature | 2021

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

A cluster randomised trial of a Needs Assessment Tool for adult Cancer patients and their carers (NAT-C) in primary care: A feasibility study.

Clark Joseph J Amoakwa Elvis E Wright-Hughes Alexandra A Blenkinsopp John J Currow David C DC Meads David D Farrin Amanda A Allgar Victoria V Macleod Una U Johnson Miriam M

PloS one 20210128 1

<h4>Background</h4>People with cancer often have unidentified symptoms and social care needs. The Needs Assessment Tool-Cancer (NAT-C) is a validated, structured method of assessing patient/carer concerns and prompting action, to address unmet need.<h4>Aims</h4>Assess feasibility and acceptability of a definitive two-armed cluster randomised trial of NAT-C in primary care by evaluating: recruitment of GP practices, patients and carers; most effective approach of ensuring NAT-C appointments, acce ...[more]

PMID: 33507949

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundInformal carers play a key supportive role for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. However, caring can have a considerable impact on health and wellbeing. Carers may have unidentified support needs that could be a target for intervention. Literature on the support needs of informal carers has not been fully synthesised, and our knowledge of the comprehensiveness of the Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool for these individuals is limited.AimTo explore whether the Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool covers the support needs of carers of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease identified in published literature.DesignEnglish language studies were identified against predetermined inclusion/exclusion criteria through database searching. Further studies were identified through searching reference lists and citations of included papers. Papers were critically appraised and data extracted and synthesised by two reviewers. Identified needs were mapped to Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool questions.Data sourcesMEDLINE, CINAHL, EMBASE, CDSR, ASSIA, PsycINFO and Scopus databases (Jan 1997-Dec 2017).ResultsTwenty-four studies were included. Results suggest that carers have support needs in a range of domains including physical, social, psychological and spiritual. Many of these needs are unmet. Particular areas of concern relate to prolonged social isolation, accessing services, emotional support and information needs. Findings also suggest amendment of the Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool may be required relating to difficulties within relationship management.ConclusionEvidence suggests that carers of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease would benefit from identification and response to their support needs by healthcare professionals but to enable this, the Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool requires an additional question. Future planned work will explore this with carers of patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease.

Project description:Despite the evidence that many stroke survivors report longer term unmet needs, the provision of longer term care is limited. To address this, we are conducting a programme of research to develop an evidence-based and replicable longer term care strategy. The developed complex intervention (named New Start), which includes needs identification, exploration of social networks and components of problem solving and self-management, was designed to improve quality of life by addressing unmet needs and increasing participation.A multicentre, cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial designed to inform the design of a possible future definitive cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) and explore the potential clinical and cost-effectiveness of New Start. Ten stroke services across the UK will be randomised on a 1:1 basis either to implement New Start or continue with usual care only. New Start will be delivered by trained facilitators and will be offered to all stroke survivors within the services allocated to the intervention arm. Stroke survivors will be eligible for the trial if they are 4-6 months post-stroke and residing in the community. Carers (if available) will also be invited to take part. Invitation to participate will be initiated by post and outcome measures will be collected via postal questionnaires at 3, 6 and 9 months after recruitment. Outcome data relating to perceived health and disability, wellbeing and quality of life as well as unmet needs will be collected. A 'study within a trial' (SWAT) is planned to determine the most acceptable format in which to provide the postal questionnaires. Details of health and social care service usage will also be collected to inform the economic evaluation. The feasibility of recruiting services and stroke survivors to the trial and of collecting postal outcomes will be assessed and the potential for effectiveness will be investigated. An embedded process evaluation (reported separately) will assess implementation fidelity and explore and clarify causal assumptions regarding implementation.This feasibility trial with embedded process evaluation will allow us to gather important and detailed data regarding methodological and implementation issues to inform the design of a possible future definitive cRCT of this complex intervention.ISRCTN38920246 . Registered 22 June 2016.

Project description:In 2011, more than half of the patients with stroke in Australian hospitals were not assessed for the need for rehabilitation. Further, there were no recommended criteria to guide rehabilitation assessment decisions. Subsequently, a decision-making tool called the Assessment for Rehabilitation Tool (ART) was developed. The ART was designed to assist Australian hospital clinicians to identify the rehabilitation needs of patients with stroke using evidence-based criteria. The ART was released and made freely available for use in 2012. This study evaluated the effectiveness of an education-only intervention (1 onsite education session and distribution of the ART) and a multifaceted intervention (2 or more onsite education sessions, distribution of the ART, audit and feedback, barrier identification, site-specific strategy development, promotion of interdisciplinary teamwork, opinion leaders and reminders) for improving assessments of rehabilitation needs after stroke.Ten hospitals in 2 states of Australia were randomly assigned to an education-only or a multifaceted intervention. Medical records were audited by assessors blinded to group allocation before and after the implementation period. Difference in the proportion of patients assessed for rehabilitation before and after the intervention was analysed using mixed-effects logistic regression analysis, with time period as the dependent variable, an interaction between intervention type and time included to test for differences between the interventions, and hospital included as the random effect to account for patient clustering.Data from 586 patients (284 pre-intervention; 302 post-intervention; age 76 years, 59 % male) showed that the multifaceted intervention was not more effective than education-only in improving the proportion of patients whose rehabilitation needs were assessed (reference category education-only; odds ratio 1.29, 95 % confidence interval 0.63-2.67, p = 0.483). Post-intervention, the odds of a patient's rehabilitation needs being assessed was 3.69 times greater than pre-intervention (95 % confidence interval 2.57-5.30, p < 0.001). Evidence-based criteria were not consistently used when patients were deemed to have no rehabilitation needs.A multifaceted intervention was not more effective than education-only in improving the assessment of rehabilitation needs of patients with stroke. Further interventions are required to ensure that all patients are assessed for the need for rehabilitation using evidence-based criteria.ANZCTR (Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry), ACTRN12616000340437.

Project description:IntroductionGoal-setting is recommended for patients with multimorbidity, but there is little evidence to support its use in general practice.ObjectiveTo assess the feasibility of goal-setting for patients with multimorbidity, before undertaking a definitive trial.Design and settingCluster-randomised controlled feasibility trial of goal-setting compared with control in six general practices.ParticipantsAdults with two or more long term health conditions and at risk of unplanned hospital admission.InterventionsGeneral practitioners (GPs) underwent training and patients were asked to consider goals before an initial goal-setting consultation and a follow-up consultation 6 months later. The control group received usual care planning.Outcome measuresHealth-related quality of life (EQ-5D-5L), capability (ICEpop CAPability measure for Older people), Patient Assessment of Chronic Illness Care and healthcare use. All consultations were video-recorded or audio-recorded, and focus groups were held with participating GPs and patients.ResultsFifty-two participants were recruited with a response rate of 12%. Full follow-up data were available for 41. In the goal-setting group, mean age was 80.4 years, 54% were female and the median number of prescribed medications was 13, compared with 77.2 years, 39% female and 11.5 medications in the control group. The mean initial consultation time was 23.0 min in the goal-setting group and 19.2 in the control group. Overall 28% of patient participants had no cognitive impairment. Participants set between one and three goals on a wide range of subjects, such as chronic disease management, walking, maintaining social and leisure interests, and weight management. Patient participants found goal-setting acceptable and would have liked more frequent follow-up. GPs unanimously liked goal-setting and felt it delivered more patient-centred care, and they highlighted the importance of training.ConclusionsThis goal-setting intervention was feasible to deliver in general practice. A larger, definitive study is needed to test its effectiveness.Trial registration numberISRCTN13248305; Post-results.

Project description:IntroductionReducing length of hospital stay for stroke survivors often creates a shift in the responsibility of care towards informal carers. Adjustment to the caregiving process is experienced by many carers as overwhelming, complex and demanding and can have a detrimental impact on mental and physical health and well-being. National policy guidelines recommend that carers' needs are considered and addressed; despite this, few interventions have been developed and empirically evaluated. We developed a biopsychosocial intervention in collaboration with carers of stroke survivors. Our aim is to determine whether the intervention can be delivered in a group setting and evaluated using a randomised controlled trial (RCT).Methods and analysisFeasibility RCT and nested qualitative interview study. We aim to recruit up to 40 stroke carers within 1?year of the stroke onset. Carers are randomised to usual care or usual care plus biopsychosocial intervention. Each intervention group will consist of five stroke carers. The intervention will focus on: psychoeducation, psychological adjustment to stroke, strategies for reducing unwanted negative thoughts and emotions and problem-solving strategies. The main outcome is the feasibility of conducting an RCT. Carer outcomes at 6?months include: anxiety and depression, quality of life and carer strain. Data are also collected from stroke survivors at baseline and 6?months including: level of disability, anxiety and depression, and quality of life.Ethics and disseminationFavourable ethical opinion was provided by East Midlands - Nottingham2 Research Ethics Committee (14/EMI/1264). This study will determine whether delivery of the biopsychosocial intervention is feasible and acceptable to stroke carers within a group format. It will also determine whether it is feasible to evaluate the effects of the biopsychosocial intervention in an RCT. We will disseminate our findings through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national and international conferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN15643456; Pre-results.

Project description:BackgroundParent carers of children with special educational needs or disability are at higher risk of poor mental and physical health. The need for a tailored, peer-led group programme was raised by parent carers, who co-developed the Healthy Parent Carers programme with researchers. This study aimed to test the feasibility of programme delivery in community settings, and the feasibility and acceptability of a randomised controlled trial design.MethodsParticipants were individually randomised with concealed allocation to a structured group programme and access to online resources (intervention), or access to the online resources only (control). Measures of wellbeing and secondary and economic outcomes were collected before randomisation, immediately post-intervention, and 6 months post-intervention. Descriptive statistics on recruitment and attrition, demographics, attendance, and fidelity of intervention delivery were analysed with feedback on the acceptability of the trial design.ResultsOne hundred and ninety-three parent carers expressed an interest in taking part. Ninety-two participants recruited from across six sites were randomised (47 intervention, 45 control). Lead and assistant facilitators were trained and delivered the group sessions. Sixteen (34%) participants in the intervention arm did not attend any sessions, and attendance varied across sites and sessions. One participant withdrew post-randomisation, and 83 (90%) participants completed outcome measures at the six-month follow-up.ConclusionsThe study demonstrated that it was feasible to deliver the programme in community settings. The number of parent carers who expressed interest signifies the need for such a programme and the feasibility of recruiting to a definitive trial. Loss to follow-up was low. Further research is needed to explore ways to reduce barriers to participation in person and assess the feasibility and acceptability of programme content and delivery for more ethnically diverse groups, and potentially using interpreters. Given the Covid-19 pandemic and delivery format feedback, there is also a need to investigate remote or blended delivery strategies. Although the results indicate that a definitive trial is feasible, programme impact would be strengthened through exploration of these uncertainties.Trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN15144652 , registered on 25 October 2018, ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03705221 , registered on 15 October 2018.

Project description:BACKGROUND: Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease (COPD) is a growing worldwide problem that imposes a great burden on the daily life of patients. Since there is no cure, the goal of treating COPD is to maintain or improve quality of life. We have developed a new tool, the Assessment of Burden of COPD (ABC) tool, to assess and visualize the integrated health status of patients with COPD, and to provide patients and healthcare providers with a treatment algorithm. This tool may be used during consultations to monitor the burden of COPD and to adjust treatment if necessary. The aim of the current study is to analyse the effectiveness of the ABC tool compared with usual care on health related quality of life among COPD patients over a period of 18 months. METHODS/DESIGN: A cluster randomised controlled trial will be conducted in COPD patients in both primary and secondary care throughout the Netherlands. An intervention group, receiving care based on the ABC tool, will be compared with a control group receiving usual care. The primary outcome will be the change in score on a disease-specific-quality-of-life questionnaire, the Saint George Respiratory Questionnaire. Secondary outcomes will be a different questionnaire (the COPD Assessment Test), lung function and number of exacerbations. During the 18 months follow-up, seven measurements will be conducted, including a baseline and final measurement. Patients will receive questionnaires to be completed at home. Additional data, such as number of exacerbations, will be recorded by the patients' healthcare providers. A total of 360 patients will be recruited by 40 general practitioners and 20 pulmonologists. Additionally, a process evaluation will be performed among patients and healthcare providers. DISCUSSION: The new ABC tool complies with the 2014 Global Initiative for Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease guidelines, which describe the necessity to classify patients on both their airway obstruction and a comprehensive symptom assessment. It has been developed to classify patients, but also to provide visual insight into the burden of COPD and to provide treatment advice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Register, NTR3788.

Dataset Information

A cluster randomised trial of a Needs Assessment Tool for adult Cancer patients and their carers (NAT-C) in primary care: A feasibility study.

Background

Aims

Methods

Results

Conclusion

Publications

A cluster randomised trial of a Needs Assessment Tool for adult Cancer patients and their carers (NAT-C) in primary care: A feasibility study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure