scholarly journals Lee Silverman Voice Treatment versus standard speech and language therapy versus control in Parkinson’s disease: preliminary cost-consequence analysis of the PD COMM pilot randomised controlled trial

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Scobie ◽  
Sue Jowett ◽  
Tosin Lambe ◽  
Smitaa Patel ◽  
Rebecca Woolley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Language Therapy ◽  
Voice Treatment ◽  
Cost Consequence ◽  
Randomised Controlled

Abstract Background The PD COMM pilot randomised controlled trial compared Lee Silverman Voice Treatment (LSVT® LOUD) with standard NHS speech and language therapy (SLT) and a control arm in people with Parkinson’s disease (PwPD) with self-reported problems with voice or speech. This analysis compares costs and quality of life outcomes between the trial arms, and considers the validity of the alternative outcome measures for economic evaluations. Methods A comparison of costs and outcomes was undertaken alongside the PD COMM pilot trial involving three arms: LSVT® LOUD treatment (n = 30); standard NHS SLT (n = 30); and a control arm (n = 29) excluded from receiving therapy for at least 6 months after randomisation unless deemed medically necessary. For all trial arms, resource use and NHS, social care and patient costs and quality of life were collected prospectively at baseline, 3, 6, and 12 months. Total economic costs and outcomes (EQ-5D-3L, ICECAP-O) were considered over the 12-month follow-up period from an NHS payer perspective. Quality of life measures for economic evaluation of SLT for people with Parkinson’s disease were compared. Results Whilst there was no difference between arms in voice or quality of life outcomes at 12 months, there were indications of differences at 3 months in favour of SLT, which need to be confirmed in the main trial. The estimated mean cost of NHS care was £3288 per patient per year for the LSVT® LOUD arm, £2033 for NHS SLT, and £1788 for the control arm. EQ-5D-3L was more strongly correlated to voice impairment than ICECAP-O, and was sensitive to differences in voice impairment between arms. Conclusions The pilot did not identify an effect of SLT on disease-specific or economic outcomes for PwPD at 12 months; however, there appeared to be improvements at 3 months. In addition to the sample size not powered to detect difference in cost-consequence analysis, many patients in the control arm started SLT during the 12-month period used for economic analysis, in line with the study protocol. The LSVT® LOUD intervention was more intense and therefore more costly. Early indications suggest that the preferred economic outcome measure for the full trial is EQ-5D-3L; however, the ICECAP-O should still be included to capture a broader measure of wellbeing. Trial registration International Standard Randomised Controlled Trial Number Register: ISRCTN75223808. Registered 22 March 2012.

scholarly journals Virtual games and quality of life in Parkinson’s disease: A randomised controlled trial

2013 ◽  
Vol 02 (04) ◽  
pp. 97-101 ◽  
Author(s):  
Glicia Pedreira ◽  
Antonio Prazeres ◽  
Danilo Cruz ◽  
Irênio Gomes ◽  
Larissa Monteiro ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomised Controlled

scholarly journals Clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of physiotherapy and occupational therapy versus no therapy in mild to moderate Parkinson’s disease: a large pragmatic randomised controlled trial (PD REHAB)

2016 ◽  
Vol 20 (63) ◽  
pp. 1-96 ◽  
Author(s):  
Carl E Clarke ◽  
Smitaa Patel ◽  
Natalie Ives ◽  
Caroline E Rick ◽  
Rebecca Woolley ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
Cost Effectiveness ◽  
Adverse Events ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Clinical Effectiveness ◽  
Randomised Controlled ◽  
The Uk

BackgroundCochrane reviews of physiotherapy (PT) and occupational therapy (OT) for Parkinson’s disease found insufficient evidence of effectiveness, but previous trials were methodologically flawed with small sample size and short-term follow-up.ObjectivesTo evaluate the clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of individualised PT and OT in Parkinson’s disease.DesignLarge pragmatic randomised controlled trial.SettingThirty-eight neurology and geriatric medicine outpatient clinics in the UK.ParticipantsSeven hundred and sixty-two patients with mild to moderate Parkinson’s disease reporting limitations in activities of daily living (ADL).InterventionPatients were randomised online to either both PT and OT NHS services (n = 381) or no therapy (n = 381). Therapy incorporated a patient-centred approach with individual assessment and goal setting.Main outcome measuresThe primary outcome was instrumental ADL measured by the patient-completed Nottingham Extended Activities of Daily Living (NEADL) scale at 3 months after randomisation. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life [Parkinson’s Disease Questionnaire-39 (PDQ-39); European Quality of Life-5 Dimensions (EQ-5D)], adverse events, resource use and carer quality of life (Short Form questionnaire-12 items). Outcomes were assessed before randomisation and at 3, 9 and 15 months after randomisation.ResultsData from 92% of the participants in each group were available at the primary time point of 3 months, but there was no difference in NEADL total score [difference 0.5 points, 95% confidence interval (CI) –0.7 to 1.7;p = 0.4] or PDQ-39 summary index (0.007 points, 95% CI –1.5 to 1.5;p = 1.0) between groups. The EQ-5D quotient was of borderline significance in favour of therapy (–0.03, 95% CI –0.07 to –0.002;p = 0.04). Contact time with therapists was for a median of four visits of 58 minutes each over 8 weeks (mean dose 232 minutes). Repeated measures analysis including all time points showed no difference in NEADL total score, but PDQ-39 summary index (curves diverging at 1.6 points per annum, 95% CI 0.47 to 2.62;p = 0.005) and EQ-5D quotient (0.02, 95% CI 0.00007 to 0.03;p = 0.04) showed significant but small differences in favour of the therapy arm. Cost-effective analysis showed that therapy was associated with a slight but not significant gain in quality-adjusted life-years (0.027, 95% CI –0.010 to 0.065) at a small incremental cost (£164, 95% CI –£141 to £468), resulting in an incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of under £4000 (£3493, 95% –£169,371 to £176,358). There was no difference in adverse events or serious adverse events.ConclusionsNHS PT and OT did not produce immediate or long-term clinically meaningful improvements in ADL or quality of life in patients with mild to moderate Parkinson’s disease. This evidence does not support the use of low-dose, patient-centred, goal-directed PT and OT in patients in the early stages of Parkinson’s disease. Future research should include the development and testing of more structured and intensive PT and OT programmes in patients with all stages of Parkinson’s disease.Trial registrationCurrent Controlled Trials ISRCTN17452402.FundingThis project was funded by the NIHR Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full inHealth Technology Assessment; Vol. 20, No. 63. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information. The Birmingham Clinical Trials Unit, University of Birmingham, received support from the UK Department of Health up to March 2012. Catherine Sackley was supported by a NIHR senior investigator award, Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care East of England and West Midlands Strategic Health Authority Clinical Academic Training award.

scholarly journals Stimulation of the tibial nerve: a protocol for a multicentred randomised controlled trial for urinary problems associated with Parkinson’s disease—STARTUP

BMJ Open ◽  
2020 ◽  
Vol 10 (2) ◽  
pp. e034887 ◽  
Author(s):  
Doreen McClurg ◽  
Jalesh Panicker ◽  
Richard W Walker ◽  
AnneLouise Cunnington ◽  
Katherine H O Deane ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Parkinson’S Disease ◽  
Parkinson's Disease ◽  
International Prostate Symptom Score ◽  
Bladder Dysfunction ◽  
Tibial Nerve ◽  
Short Form ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionParkinson’s disease is the second most common chronic neurodegenerative condition with bladder dysfunction affecting up to 71%. Symptoms affect quality of life and include urgency, frequency, hesitancy, nocturia and incontinence. Addressing urinary dysfunction is one of the top 10 priority research areas identified by the James Lind Alliance and Parkinson’s UK.ObjectivesConduct a randomised controlled trial (RCT) targeting people with Parkinson’s disease (PwP) who have self-reported problematic lower urinary tract symptoms, investigating the effectiveness of transcutaneous tibial nerve stimulation (TTNS) compared with sham TTNS. Implement a standardised training approach and package for the correct application of TTNS. Conduct a cost-effectiveness analysis of TTNS compared with sham TTNS.Methods and analysisAn RCT of 6 weeks with twice weekly TTNS or sham TTNS. Participants will be recruited in 12 National Health Service neurology/movement disorder services, using a web-based randomisation system, and will be shown how to apply TTNS or sham TTNS. Participants will receive a weekly telephone call from the researchers during the intervention period. The trial has two coprimary outcome measures: International Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire-Urinary Incontinence Short Form and the International Prostate Symptom Score. Secondary outcomes include a 3-day bladder diary, quality of life, acceptability and fidelity and health economic evaluation. Outcomes will be measured at 0, 6 and 12 weeks.A sample size of 208 randomised in equal numbers to the two arms will provide 90% power to detect a clinically important difference of 2.52 points on the Internatioanl Consultation on Incontinence Questionnaire - Short Form (ICIQ-SF) and of 3 points in the International Prostate Symptom Score total score at 12 weeks at 5% significance level, based on an SD of 4.7 in each arm and 20% attrition at 6 weeks. Analysis will be by intention to treat and pre defined in a statistical analysis planEthics and disseminationEast of Scotland Research Ethics Service (EoSRES), 18/ES00042, obtained on 10 May 2018. The trial will allow us to determine effectiveness, safety, cost and acceptability of TTNS for bladder dysfunction in PWP. Results will be published in open access journals; lay reports will be posted to all participants and presented at conferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN12437878; Pre-results.

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 Evaluating the provision of Further Enabling Care at Home (FECH+) for informal caregivers of older adults discharged home from hospital: protocol for a multicentre randomised controlled trial

BMJ Open ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 11 (6) ◽  
pp. e046600
Author(s):  
Anne-Marie Hill ◽  
Rachael Moorin ◽  
Susan Slatyer ◽  
Christina Bryant ◽  
Keith Hill ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Older Adults ◽  
Randomised Controlled Trial ◽  
Usual Care ◽  
Controlled Trial ◽  
Informal Caregivers ◽  
Care Recipient ◽  
Care At Home ◽  
Randomised Controlled

IntroductionThere are personal and societal benefits from caregiving; however, caregiving can jeopardise caregivers’ health. The Further Enabling Care at Home (FECH+) programme provides structured nurse support, through telephone outreach, to informal caregivers of older adults following discharge from acute hospital care to home. The trial aims to evaluate the efficacy of the FECH+ programme on caregivers’ health-related quality of life (HRQOL) after care recipients’ hospital discharge.Methods and analysisA multisite, parallel-group, randomised controlled trial with blinded baseline and outcome assessment and intention-to-treat analysis, adhering to Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials guidelines will be conducted. Participants (N=925 dyads) comprising informal home caregiver (18 years or older) and care recipient (70 years or older) will be recruited when the care recipient is discharged from hospital. Caregivers of patients discharged from wards in three hospitals in Australia (one in Western Australia and two in Queensland) are eligible for inclusion. Participants will be randomly assigned to one of the two groups. The intervention group receive the FECH+ programme, which provides structured support and problem-solving for the caregiver after the care recipient’s discharge, in addition to usual care. The control group receives usual care. The programme is delivered by a registered nurse and comprises six 30–45 min telephone support sessions over 6 months. The primary outcome is caregivers’ HRQOL measured using the Assessment of Quality of Life—eight dimensions. Secondary outcomes include caregiver preparedness, strain and distress and use of healthcare services. Changes in HRQOL between groups will be compared using a mixed regression model that accounts for the correlation between repeated measurements.Ethics and disseminationParticipants will provide written informed consent. Ethics approvals have been obtained from Sir Charles Gairdner and Osborne Park Health Care Group, Curtin University, Griffith University, Gold Coast Health Service and government health data linkage services. Findings will be disseminated through presentations, peer-reviewed journals and conferences.Trial registration numberACTRN12620000060943.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document