Association of a Lay Health Worker–Led Intervention on Goals of Care, Quality of Life, and Clinical Trial Participation Among Low-Income and Minority Adults With Cancer

PURPOSE: New approaches are needed to overcome low supportive care and clinical trial participation among low-income and minority adults with cancer. The objective of this project was to determine whether a lay health worker intervention was associated with improvements in supportive care and trial participation. METHODS: We conducted a quality improvement initiative in collaboration with a union organization. We enrolled union members newly diagnosed with cancer into a 6-month lay health worker–led intervention from October 15, 2016, to February 28, 2017. The primary outcome was goals of care. Secondary outcomes were health-related quality of life (HRQOL), health care use, and trial participation. All outcomes except HRQOL were compared with a cohort of union members diagnosed within the 6-month preintervention period. RESULTS: Sixty-six adults participated in the intervention group, and we identified 72 adults in the control group. Demographic characteristics were similar between groups. The mean age was 56.0 years; 47 (34%) were male, and 22 were White (16%). Within 6 months enrollment, more intervention group participants, as compared with the control, had clinician-documented goals of care (94% v 26%; P < .001) and participated in cancer clinical trials (72% v 22%; P < .001). At 4 months postenrollment, as compared with baseline, intervention participants experienced HRQOL improvements (mean difference, 3.98 points; standard deviation, 2.83; P < .001). Before death, more intervention group participants used palliative care and hospice than the control group. CONCLUSION: Lay health worker–led interventions may improve supportive care and clinical trial participation among low-income and minority populations with cancer.

Measuring functional disability in children with developmental disorders in low-resource settings: validation of Developmental Disorders-Children Disability Assessment Schedule (DD-CDAS) in rural Pakistan

Background Developmental disorders (DDs) in children are a priority condition and guidelines have been developed for their management within low-resource community settings. However, a key obstacle is lack of open access, reliable and valid tools that lay health workers can use to evaluate the impact of such programmes on child outcomes. We adapted and validated the World Health Organization's Disability Assessment Schedule for children (WHODAS-Child), a lay health worker-administered functioning-related tool, for children with DDs in Pakistan. Methods Lay health workers administered a version of the WHODAS-Child to parents of children with DDs (N = 400) and without DDs (N = 400), aged 2–12 years, after it was adapted using qualitative study. Factor analysis, validity, reliability and sensitivity to change analyses were conducted to evaluate the psychometric properties of the adapted outcome measure. Results Among 800 children, 58% of children were male [mean (s.d.) age 6.68 (s.d. = 2.89)]. Confirmatory Factor Analysis showed a robust factor structure [χ2/df 2.86, RMSEA 0.068 (90% CI 0.064–0.073); Tucker–Lewis Index (TLI) 0.92; Comparative Fit Index (CFI) 0.93; Incremental Fit Index (IFI) 0.93]. The tool demonstrated high internal consistency (α 0.82–0.94), test–retest [Intra-class Correlation Coefficient (ICC) 0.71–0.98] and inter-data collector (ICC 0.97–0.99) reliabilities; good criterion (r −0.71), convergent (r −0.35 to 0.71) and discriminative [M (s.d.) 52.00 (s.d. = 21.97) v. 2.14 (s.d. = 4.00); 95% CI −52.05 to −47.67] validities; and adequate sensitivity to change over time (ES 0.19–0.23). Conclusions The lay health worker administrated version of adapted WHODAS-Child is a reliable, valid and sensitive-to-change measure of functional disability in children aged 2–12 years with DDs in rural community settings of Pakistan.

Lay Health Worker-Led Cancer Symptom Screening Intervention and the Effect on Patient-Reported Satisfaction, Health Status, Health Care Use, and Total Costs: Results From a Tri-Part Collaboration

PURPOSE: Poor patient experiences and increasing costs from undertreated symptoms require approaches that improve patient-reported outcomes and lower expenditures. We developed and evaluated the effect of a lay health worker (LHW)-led symptom screening intervention on satisfaction, self-reported overall and mental health, health care use, total costs, and survival. METHODS: From November 1, 2015, to September 30, 2016, we enrolled in this study all newly diagnosed Medicare Advantage enrollees with stage 3 or 4 solid tumors or hematologic malignancies who were receiving care in a community oncology practice. We evaluated symptom changes from baseline to 12 months for the intervention group. We compared with a control group (a historical cohort of Medicare Advantage enrollees diagnosed with cancer from November 1, 2014, to October 31, 2015) changes in satisfaction and overall and mental health with validated assessments at diagnosis and 5 months postdiagnosis, 12-month health care use, total costs, and survival. RESULTS: Among 186 patients in the intervention group and 102 in the control group, most were female and non-Hispanic white or Hispanic, and the mean age was 79 years. There were no survival differences between the groups. Relative to the control group, the intervention group experienced improvements in satisfaction with care (difference-in-difference: 1.35; 95% CI, 1.08 to 1.63), overall health (odds ratio, 2.23; 95% CI, 1.49 to 3.32), and mental or emotional health (odds ratio, 2.22; 95% CI, 1.46 to 3.38) over time; fewer hospitalizations (mean ± standard deviation: 0.72 ± 0.96 v 1.02 ± 1.44; P = .03) and emergency department visits per 1,000 members per year (0.61 ± 0.98 v 0.92 ± 1.53; P = .03), and lower median (interquartile range) total health care costs ($21,266 [$8,102-$47,900] v $31,946 [$15,754-$57,369]; P = .02). CONCLUSION: An LHW-led symptom screening intervention could be one solution to improve value-based cancer care.