Explore the vast range of titles available.

Patients with advanced cancer have reduced quality of life, which tends to worsen towards the end of life. We assessed the effect of early palliative care in patients with advanced cancer on several aspects of quality of life. The study took place at the Princess Margaret Cancer Centre (Toronto, ON, Canada), between Dec 1, 2006, and Feb 28, 2011. 24 medical oncology clinics were cluster randomised (in a 1:1 ratio, using a computer-generated sequence, stratified by clinic size and tumour site [four lung, eight gastrointestinal, four genitourinary, six breast, two gynaecological]), to consultation and follow-up (at least monthly) by a palliative care team or to standard cancer care. Complete masking of interventions was not possible; however, patients provided written informed consent to participate in their own study group, without being informed of the existence of another group. Eligible patients had advanced cancer, European Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2, and a clinical prognosis of 6–24 months. Quality of life (Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy—Spiritual Well-Being [FACIT-Sp] scale and Quality of Life at the End of Life [QUAL-E] scale), symptom severity (Edmonton Symptom Assessment System [ESAS]), satisfaction with care (FAMCARE-P16), and problems with medical interactions (Cancer Rehabilitation Evaluation System Medical Interaction Subscale [CARES-MIS]) were measured at baseline and monthly for 4 months. The primary outcome was change score for FACIT-Sp at 3 months. Secondary endpoints included change score for FACIT-Sp at 4 months and change scores for other scales at 3 and 4 months. This trial is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01248624. 461 patients completed baseline measures (228 intervention, 233 control); 393 completed at least one follow-up assessment. At 3-months, there was a non-significant difference in change score for FACIT-Sp between intervention and control groups (3·56 points [95% CI −0·27 to 7·40], p=0·07), a significant difference in QUAL-E (2·25 [0·01 to 4·49], p=0·05) and FAMCARE-P16 (3·79 [1·74 to 5·85], p=0·0003), and no difference in ESAS (−1·70 [−5·26 to 1·87], p=0·33) or CARES-MIS (−0·66 [−2·25 to 0·94], p=0·40). At 4 months, there were significant differences in change scores for all outcomes except CARES-MIS. All differences favoured the intervention group. Although the difference in quality of life was non-significant at the primary endpoint, this trial shows promising findings that support early palliative care for patients with advanced cancer. Canadian Cancer Society, Ontario Ministry of Health and Long Term Care.

BackgroundSpecialised palliative care trials often fail to address intervention effects on caregiver anxiety and depression, particularly in bereavement. We evaluate effects of specialised palliative care and dyadic psychological intervention on caregiver anxiety and depression in a randomised controlled trial (RCT).MethodsPatients with incurable cancer and limited antineoplastic treatment options and their caregivers, recruited from a university hospital oncology department, were randomised (1:1) to care as usual or accelerated transition from oncological treatment to home-based specialised palliative care. We assessed caregivers’ symptoms of anxiety and depression with the Symptom Checklist-92 up to six months after randomisation and 19 months into bereavement, and estimated intervention effects in mixed effects models.ResultsThe ‘Domus’ trial enrolled 258 caregivers. The intervention significantly attenuated increases in caregivers’ symptoms of anxiety overall (estimated difference, −0.12; 95% confidence interval, −0.22 to −0.01, p = 0.0266), and symptoms of depression at eight weeks (−0.17; −0.33 to −0.02; p = 0.0314), six months (−0.27; −0.49 to −0.05; p = 0.0165), and in bereavement at two weeks (−0.28; −0.52 to −0.03; p = 0.0295) and two months (−0.24; −0.48 to −0.01; p = 0.0448).ConclusionsThis first RCT evaluating specialised palliative care with dyadic psychological support significantly attenuated caregiver anxiety and depression before and during bereavement. (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01885637)

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.

Background Cancer is increasing worldwide. Palliative care can help reduce the suffering of patients with cancer. Providing palliative care with a primary health care (PHC) approach can lead to greater patient access to palliative services. Given the lack of studies in this area, the present study aimed to determine the impact of community-based palliative care integrated with PHC on outcomes of terminally ill cancer patients. Methods This was a randomized controlled trial. Research population included 120 cancer patients in Khorramabad in 2023. A convenience sampling method was conducted, and then subjects were allocated to the intervention and control groups through randomization blocks with size of four. Subjects in the intervention group received PHC-integrated community-based palliative support for two months, while their control peers received their routine health care programs during the same period. The data were gathered using the Palliative Care Outcome Scale before and two months after the intervention and then were analyzed using SPSS 22 software and descriptive and inferential statistics. Results The mean scores of all dimensions of palliative outcomes, including physical, psychological, emotional, and social, as well as the overall palliative care outcome, improved after the intervention in the experimental group, and these changes were statistically significant ( p  < 0.001). Before the intervention, the mean score of overall palliative care outcome was 22.21 ± 2.89 in the intervention group and 21.88 ± 2.55 in the control group ( P  = 0.51), While after the intervention, the mean scores in the experimental and control groups changed to 17.98 ± 2.88 and 21.83 ± 2.69, respectively, and this difference was statistically significant ( p  < 0.001). The mean changes in the overall palliative outcome score before and after the intervention in the experimental and control groups were 4.23 ± 2.83 and 0.5 ± 0.72, respectively, and this difference was statistically significant ( p  < 0.001). Conclusion The community-based palliative care integrated into the PHC structure could positively affect all aspects of palliative care. It is recommended that policymakers create conditions where cancer patients can receive care through the PHC structure. More studies are required to designate the strengths and weaknesses of this care approach. Trial registration number IRCT20180721040540N5, 2023-06-07, Registered on June 7,2023. https://irct.behdasht.gov.ir/user/trial/68288/view .

The quality of care provided to patients with cancer who are dying in hospital and their families is suboptimum. The UK Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP) for patients who are dying was developed with the aim of transferring the best practice of hospices to hospitals. We therefore assessed the effectiveness of LCP in the Italian context (LCP-I) in improving the quality of end-of-life care for patients with cancer in hospitals and for their family. In this pragmatic cluster randomised trial, 16 Italian general medicine hospital wards were randomly assigned to implement the LCP-I programme or standard health-care practice. For each ward, we identified all patients who died from cancer in the 3 months before randomisation (preintervention) and in the 6 months after the completion of the LCP-I training programme. The primary endpoint was the overall quality of care toolkit scale. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01081899. During the postintervention assessment, data were gathered for 308 patients who died from cancer (147 in LCP-I programme wards and 161 in control wards). 232 (75%) of 308 family members were interviewed, 119 (81%) of 147 with relatives cared for in the LCP-I wards (mean cluster size 14·9 [range eight to 22]) and 113 (70%) of 161 in the control wards (14·1 [eight to 22]). After implementation of the LCP-I programme, no significant difference was noted in the distribution of the overall quality of care toolkit scores between the wards in which the LCP-I programme was implemented and the control wards (score 70·5 of 100 vs 63·0 of 100; cluster-adjusted mean difference 7·6 [95% CI −3·6 to 18·7]; p=0·186). The effect of the LCP-I programme in our study is less than the effects noted in earlier phase 2 trials. However, if the programme is implemented well it has the potential to reduce the gap in quality of care between hospices and hospitals. Further research is needed to ascertain what components of the LCP-I programme might be effective and to develop and assess a wider range of approaches to quality improvement in hospital care for people at the end of their lives and for their families. Italian Ministry of Health and Maruzza Lefebvre D'Ovidio Foundation-Onlus.

Palliative care philosophy is based on a holistic approach to patients, but research shows that possibilities for living up to this philosophy seem limited by historical and administrative structures. From the nurse perspective, this article aims to explore nursing practice in specialised palliative homecare, and how it is influenced by organisational and cultural structures. Qualitative, semi-structured interviews with nine nurses were conducted, inspired by Bourdieu. The findings showed that nurses consolidate the doxa of medicine, including medical-professional values that configure a control-oriented, positivistic approach, supported by the organising policy for clinical practice. Hierarchically, nurses were positioned under doctors: medical rounds functioned as a structuring structure for their working day. They acted as medical assistants, and the prevailing medical logic seemed to make it difficult for nurses to meet their own humanistic ideals. Only short time slots allowed nurses to prioritise psychosocial needs of patients and relatives. Point-of-actions had high priority, added financial resources and ensured that budgets were allocated. Weekly visits made it possible for nurses to measure, control and govern patients’ drugs and symptoms which was a necessity for their function as medical assistants. The findings challenge nurses to take on an ethical point of view, partly to ensure that patients and their families receive good palliative care focusing on more than medical issues and logic, and partly to strengthen the nurses’ profession in the palliative field and help them implement palliative care philosophy in practice.

Multiple sclerosis results in both physical and psychological disability but some patients have needs that are not adequately met by existing services. Our objective was to explore whether a new palliative care service improved outcomes for people severely affected by multiple sclerosis. A delayed intervention randomized controlled trial was undertaken with multiple sclerosis patients deemed by staff to have palliative care needs. The intervention was a multiprofessional palliative care team assessment and follow-up. The intervention group was offered the team immediately (fast track, FI); the control group continued best standard care and then offered the team after 3 months (standard intervention, SI). The main outcome measures were: patient reported issues using the Palliative Care Outcome Scale and Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale at 12 weeks and caregiver burden using the Zarit Burden Inventory. Sixty-nine people were referred to the service; 52 consented or were eligible to be randomized (26 to the FI and 26 to the SI groups). At 12 weeks people in the FI group had an improvement (mean change —1.0) in the total score of 5 key symptoms whereas there was deterioration in the SI group (mean change 1.1, F = 4.75, p = 0.035). There was no difference in the change in general Palliative Care Outcome Scale or Multiple Sclerosis Impact Scale scores. There was an improvement in caregiver burden in the FI group and a deterioration in the SI group (F = 7.60, p = 0.013). Involvement with the palliative care service appeared to positively affect some key symptoms and reduced informal caregiver burden.

PurposeVeterans with advanced cancer can receive hospice care concurrently with treatments such as radiation and chemotherapy. However, variations exist in concurrent care use across Veterans Affairs (VA) medical centers (VAMCs), and overall, concurrent care use is relatively rare. In this qualitative study, we aimed to identify, describe, and explain factors that influence the provision of concurrent cancer care (defined as chemotherapy or radiation treatments provided with hospice) for veterans with terminal cancer.MethodsFrom August 2015 to April 2016, we conducted six site visits and interviewed 76 clinicians and staff at six VA sites and their contracted community hospices, including community hospices (n = 16); VA oncology (n = 25); VA palliative care (n = 17); and VA inpatient hospice and palliative care units (n = 18).ResultsThematic qualitative content analysis found three themes that influenced the provision of concurrent care: (1) clinicians and staff at community hospices and at VAs viewed concurrent care as a viable care option, as it preserved hope and relationships while patient goals are clarified during transitions to hospice; and (2) the presence of dedicated liaisons facilitated care coordination and education about concurrent care; however, (3) clinicians and staff concerns about Medicare guideline compliance hindered use of concurrent care.ConclusionsWhile concurrent care is used by a small number of veterans with advanced cancer, VA staff valued having the option available and as a bridge to hospice. Hospice staff felt concurrent care improved care coordination with VAMCs, but use may be tempered due to concerns related to Medicare compliance.

Purpose This study aimed to evaluate what types and forms of support nursing staff need in providing palliative care for persons with dementia. Another aim was to compare the needs of nursing staff with different educational levels and working in home care or in nursing homes. Design A cross‐sectional, descriptive survey design was used. Methods A questionnaire was administered to a convenience sample of Dutch nursing staff working in the home care or nursing home setting. Data were collected from July through October 2018. Quantitative survey data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. Data from two open‐ended survey questions were investigated using content analysis. Findings The sample comprised 416 respondents. Nursing staff with different educational levels and working in different settings indicated largely similar needs. The highest‐ranking needs for support were in dealing with family disagreement in end‐of‐life decision making (58%), dealing with challenging behaviors (41%), and recognizing and managing pain (38%). The highest‐ranking form of support was peer‐to‐peer learning (51%). If respondents would have more time to do their work, devoting personal attention would be a priority. Conclusions Nursing staff with different educational levels and working in home care or in nursing homes endorsed similar needs in providing palliative care for persons with dementia and their loved ones. Clinical Relevance It is critical to understand the specific needs of nursing staff in order to develop tailored strategies. Interventions aimed at increasing the competence of nursing staff in providing palliative care for persons with dementia may target similar areas to support a heterogeneous group of nurses and nurse assistants, working in home care or in a nursing home.

AimsIn this randomised fast-track phase II trial, the authors examined (1) whether the timing of referral to short-term palliative care (PC) affected selected outcomes, and (2) the potential staff-modifying effect of the short-term PC intervention (whether the effects were sustained over time after PC was withdrawn).MethodsPC comprised a multiprofessional PC team that provided, on average, three visits, with all care completed by 6 weeks. Recruitment commenced in August 2004 and continued for 1 year. Follow-up was performed for 6 months in both groups. Outcomes were a composite measure of five key symptoms (pain, nausea, vomiting, mouth problems and sleeping difficulty) using the Palliative care Outcome Scale–MS Symptom Scale, and care giver burden was measured using the Zarit (Care Giver) Burden Interview (ZBI).Results52 patients severely affected by multiple sclerosis were randomised to receive PC either immediately (fast-track group) or after 12 weeks (control group). Patients had a high level of disability (mean Expanded Disability Status Scale: 7.7; median: 8; SD: 1). Following PC, there was an improvement in Palliative care Outcome Scale–MS Symptom Scale score and ZBI score. A higher rate of improvement in ZBI score was seen in the fast-track group. After withdrawal of PC, effects were maintained at 12 weeks, but not at 24 weeks.ConclusionsReceiving PC earlier has a similar effect on reducing symptoms but greater effects on reducing care giver burden, compared to later referral. In this phase II trial, the authors lacked the power to detect small differences. The effect of PC is maintained for 6 weeks after withdrawal but then appears to wane.Trial Registration NumberNational Institutes of Health, USA, http://www.Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT00364936.