Impact of case management on rural women's quality of life and substance use

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.

Download Full-text

Quality of life and its related factors in women with substance use disorders referring to substance abuse treatment centers

BMC Women s Health ◽

10.1186/s12905-020-01155-7 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 21 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Majid Barati ◽

Khadijeh Bandehelahi ◽

Tahereh Nopasandasil ◽

Hanieh Jormand ◽

Amir Keshavarzi

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Life ◽

Substance Abuse ◽

Substance Use ◽

Substance Abuse Treatment ◽

Substance Use Disorders ◽

Related Factors ◽

Substance Abuse Treatment Centers ◽

The Mean ◽

Abuse Treatment

Abstract Background Substance-Related Disorders are among the most common social problems caused by using legal and illegal substances. Therefore, this study aimed at determining the quality of life (QoL) and its related factors among women with substance use disorders referring to substance abuse treatment centers in Hamadan, west of Iran. Methods This cross-sectional study was carried out on 120 Iranian female substance users recruited through the census sampling method in 2018. Data collection tools consisted of demographic characteristics and QoL assessment (SF-36). Data were analyzed using SPSS-16 via one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) and chi-square tests. Results The mean age of the participants was 33.2 ± 12.1 years and the mean score of their total QoL was 35.35 ± 13.5. The results of multiple linear regression analysis indicated that using methamphetamine (β = − 6.62) was the predictor of QoL in women. Moreover, there was a significant association between QoL and age (p < 0.001), educational level (p = 0.011), and age at first use (p < 0.001). Conclusion According to the results, the participants’ QoL was found to be at an unsatisfactory level. So, it is essential to implement educational help-seeking behavior for treatment and effectiveness educational, as well as holding mental health intervention, school-based substance abuse prevention, and harm reduction programs of substance use. This is especially important in adolescents, young, low-educated, early drug use, and methamphetamine user women, as it may increase the QoL

Download Full-text

Perceived family cohesion, social support, and quality of life in patients undergoing treatment for substance use disorders compared with patients with mental and physical disorders

Addiction Science & Clinical Practice ◽

10.1186/s13722-021-00252-8 ◽

2021 ◽

Vol 16 (1) ◽

Author(s):

Bente Birkeland ◽

Bente Weimand ◽

Torleif Ruud ◽

Darryl Maybery ◽

John-Kåre Vederhus

Keyword(s):

Quality Of Life ◽

Social Support ◽

Substance Use ◽

Substance Use Disorders ◽

Family Cohesion ◽

Service Providers ◽

Cancer Data ◽

Physical Disorders ◽

Patient Groups

Abstract Purpose Support from family and other social network elements can be important in helping patients to cope with practical and emotional consequences of diseases. The aim of the study was to examine perception of family and social support and quality of life (QoL) in patients undergoing treatment for substance use disorders (SUDs). We compared them with patients in treatment for mental disorders (MDs) and physical disorders (PDs). Methods We used data from a national multicenter study that recruited patients (N = 518) from three treatment domains; SUD treatment units, MD treatment units, and PD treatment units (severe neurological conditions or cancer). Data on family cohesion, social support, and QoL were compared across patient groups. In addition, data on health variables was collected. We used a multiple linear regression procedure to examine how health and support variables were associated with QoL. Results Family cohesion and social support in the SUD and MD groups were rated at similarly low levels, substantially lower than in the PD group. The SUD group exhibited a somewhat lower QoL than did the PD group, but their QoL was still in the near-to-normal range. In contrast, the MD group had markedly low QoL. When examining factors associated with QoL, we found that greater family cohesion and social support were positively associated with QoL. Mental distress was the strongest factor, and was negatively associated with QoL (beta − 0.15, 95% CI = − 0.17/− 0.14, p < 0.001). Conclusion Service providers need to be aware of the weaker networks and less regulatory family and/or social support available to patients with SUDs. Providers should focus consistently on the social networks of patients and include patients’ families in treatment processes.

Download Full-text