Do case conferences between general practitioners and specialist palliative care services improve quality of life? A randomised controlled trial (ISRCTN 52269003)

2008 ◽  
Vol 22 (8) ◽  
pp. 904-912 ◽  
Author(s):  
GK Mitchell ◽  
CB Del Mar ◽  
PK O’Rourke ◽  
AM Clavarino
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Improve Quality ◽  
Specialist Palliative Care ◽  
Care Services ◽  
Case Conferences ◽  
Palliative Care Services ◽  
Randomised Controlled

scholarly journals Emergency Medicine Palliative Care Access (EMPallA): protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial comparing the effectiveness of specialty outpatient versus nurse-led telephonic palliative care of older adults with advanced illness

BMJ Open ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
pp. e025692 ◽  
Author(s):  
Corita R Grudzen ◽  
Deborah J Shim ◽  
Abigail M Schmucker ◽  
Jeanne Cho ◽  
Keith S Goldfeld
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Case Management ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Chronic Obstructive ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
End Stage

IntroductionEmergency department (ED)-initiated palliative care has been shown to improve patient-centred outcomes in older adults with serious, life-limiting illnesses. However, the optimal modality for providing such interventions is unknown. This study aims to compare nurse-led telephonic case management to specialty outpatient palliative care for older adults with serious, life-limiting illness on: (1) quality of life in patients; (2) healthcare utilisation; (3) loneliness and symptom burden and (4) caregiver strain, caregiver quality of life and bereavement.Methods and analysisThis is a protocol for a pragmatic, multicentre, parallel, two-arm randomised controlled trial in ED patients comparing two established models of palliative care: nurse-led telephonic case management and specialty, outpatient palliative care. We will enrol 1350 patients aged 50+ years and 675 of their caregivers across nine EDs. Eligible patients: (1) have advanced cancer (metastatic solid tumour) or end-stage organ failure (New York Heart Association class III or IV heart failure, end-stage renal disease with glomerular filtration rate <15 mL/min/m2, or global initiative for chronic obstructive lung disease stage III, IV or oxygen-dependent chronic obstructive pulmonary disease); (2) speak English; (3) are scheduled for ED discharge or observation status; (4) reside locally; (5) have a working telephone and (6) are insured. Patients will be excluded if they: (1) have dementia; (2) have received hospice care or two or more palliative care visits in the last 6 months or (3) reside in a long-term care facility. We will use patient-level block randomisation, stratified by ED site and disease. Effectiveness will be compared by measuring the impact of each intervention on the specified outcomes. The primary outcome will measure change in patient quality of life.Ethics and disseminationInstitutional Review Board approval was obtained at all study sites. Trial results will be submitted for publication in a peer-reviewed journal.Trial registration numberNCT03325985; Pre-results.

scholarly journals Early specialist palliative care on quality of life for malignant pleural mesothelioma: a randomised controlled trial

Thorax ◽  
2019 ◽  
Vol 74 (4) ◽  
pp. 354-361 ◽  
Author(s):  
Fraser Brims ◽  
Samal Gunatilake ◽  
Iain Lawrie ◽  
Laura Marshall ◽  
Carole Fogg ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Palliative Care ◽  
Malignant Pleural Mesothelioma ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Mean Difference ◽  
Pleural Mesothelioma ◽  
Life Questionnaire ◽  
Specialist Palliative Care ◽  
European Organization

PurposeMalignant pleural mesothelioma (MPM) has a high symptom burden and poor survival. Evidence from other cancer types suggests some benefit in health-related quality of life (HRQoL) with early specialist palliative care (SPC) integrated with oncological services, but the certainty of evidence is low.MethodsWe performed a multicentre, randomised, parallel group controlled trial comparing early referral to SPC versus standard care across 19 hospital sites in the UK and one large site in Western Australia. Participants had newly diagnosed MPM; main carers were additionally recruited. Intervention: review by SPC within 3 weeks of allocation and every 4 weeks throughout the study. HRQoL was assessed at baseline and every 4 weeks with the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30. Primary outcome: change in EORTC C30 Global Health Status 12 weeks after randomisation.ResultsBetween April 2014 and October 2016, 174 participants were randomised. There was no significant between group difference in HRQoL score at 12 weeks (mean difference 1.8 (95% CI −4.9 to 8.5; p=0.59)). HRQoL did not differ at 24 weeks (mean difference −2.0 (95% CI −8.6 to 4.6; p=0.54)). There was no difference in depression/anxiety scores at 12 weeks or 24 weeks. In carers, there was no difference in HRQoL or mood at 12 weeks or 24 weeks, although there was a consistent preference for care, favouring the intervention arm.ConclusionThere is no role for routine referral to SPC soon after diagnosis of MPM for patients who are cared for in centres with good access to SPC when required.Trial registration numberISRCTN18955704.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document