FreshRSS

🔒
❌ Acerca de FreshRSS
Hay nuevos artículos disponibles. Pincha para refrescar la página.
AnteayerTus fuentes RSS

Feasibility, acceptability and efficacy of a nurse-led palliative care health coaching intervention (Educate, Nurture, Advise before Life Ends) for patients with heart failure and their caregivers in Singapore: a randomised wait-list controlled pilot stud

Por: Neo · S. H.-S. · Ong · W. S. · Liao · K. · Sim · D. K.-L. · Ng · E. S. L. · Foo · C. C.-z. · Yang Meijuan · G. · Odom · J. N. · Bakitas · M. · Cheung · Y. B.
Objectives

To evaluate the feasibility, acceptability and potential efficacy of the culturally adapted Educate, Nurture, Advise Before Life Ends (ENABLE) programme in Singapore for patients with heart failure (HF) and their family caregivers.

Design

Non-blinded randomised wait-list controlled pilot study, using Simon’s randomised phase II trial design.

Setting

Specialist outpatient clinics in a tertiary cardiac centre in Singapore.

Participants

Patients had a diagnosis of American Heart Association Stage C or D HF, were symptomatic with New York Heart Association functional class 2 and above symptoms, had a prognosis of 6 months, a hospitalisation in prior 6 months and were on disease-directed HF management. Patients already known to palliative care (PC) were excluded. Recruited caregivers were family caregivers of patients.

Intervention

ENABLE integrates PC early into HF care. It starts with a comprehensive PC assessment with a PC physician and nurse. This is followed by a series of nurse coach-led health coaching sessions for both patients and caregivers. After the completion of health coaching, participants would receive follow-up phone calls to review their coping up to 6 months post-enrolment.

Outcome measures

Feasibility was defined by the proportion of approached patient-caregiver dyads who consented to participate and the proportion of participants who completed health coaching. Acceptability was defined by a score of at least 12 out of a maximum of 16 for the Client Satisfaction Questionnaire 4-Item Survey. Primary efficacy outcome measure was the change in patient quality of life (QOL) at 6 months as measured by Kansas City Cardiomyopathy Questionnaire (KCCQ) total score, with the target effect size (Cohen’s d) being at least 0.25 SD in favour of ENABLE. Other secondary outcomes included patient/caregiver anxiety and depression scores on the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, spirituality scores on the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy-Spiritual Wellbeing Scale and caregiver QOL on the Singapore Caregiver Quality of Life Scale.

Results

Feasibility: recruitment was carried out from February 2022 to October 2023. We approached 164 patient-caregiver dyads and 60 patient-caregiver dyads (36.6%) consented. A total of 48 patients and 44 caregivers started on health coaching, of which 44 patients (91.7%) and 43 caregivers (97.7%) completed health coaching.

Acceptability: patients’ satisfaction was high, at 85.7% and 87.5% in the intervention and wait-list arm, respectively. Caregivers were similarly satisfied, at 100% and 87.5% in the two arms, respectively.

Efficacy: intervention-arm patients had a higher mean total KCCQ score at 6 months than wait-list-arm patients (difference in means=12.4; 95% CI 0.9 to 24.0; Cohen’s d=0.43). There was no difference in caregiver QOL changes between trial arms at 3 months and 6 months. Both patients and caregivers had improvements in anxiety at 3 months and sustained improvements in depression and spirituality at 6 months.

Conclusions

Proportion of participants who completed health coaching was high, though proportion of approached participants who consented was lower than expected. Our acceptability and efficacy targets were met. Further phase III testing is planned.

Trial registration number

NCT05211882.

Blood Cancer Clinical Trials Long-term Follow-up Using Integrated Healthcare Systems Data (BLISS): protocol for a data-linkage study integrating randomised clinical trials with national healthcare systems data

Por: Smith · L. · Hoang · J. · Gillson · S. · Richards · J. · Cook · G. · Brown · S. · Royle · K.-L. · Roberts · S. · Olivier · C. · Parish · C. · Spencer · K. · Thompson · S. · Cairns · D. A.
Introduction

Randomised clinical trials (RCTs) are gold standard in evidence-based medicine, but follow-up typically relies on clinic visits and trial-specific data collection. Much of this information overlaps with routinely collected healthcare systems data (HSD), such as electronic health records and national registries. Leveraging HSD for trial follow-up has the potential to reduce cost, time and resource burden. However, concerns remain about data quality and evidence is needed to show that HSD-based outcomes are reported to an equivalent standard to trial-specific data.

The Blood Cancer Clinical Trials Long-term Follow-up Using Integrated Healthcare Systems platform will link data collected from multiple myeloma clinical trials with HSD to create a research database supporting extended follow-up and further methodological and clinical research.

Methods and analysis

This data-linkage study includes participants from multiple myeloma RCTs conducted by the University of Leeds between 2008 and 2021. NHS (National Health Service) England will link these participants to HSD, including deaths and cancer registrations, systemic anticancer therapy, radiotherapy and Hospital Episode Statistics.

We will compare trial-collected outcomes with those derived from HSD, including mortality, treatment, second cancer incidence and major adverse events. Long-term overall survival will be estimated using national mortality data. HSD-derived demographic and clinical variables will be used to assess population representativeness relative to the wider myeloma population. Time to next treatment will be derived and evaluated as a surrogate for progression-free survival. HSD-derived frailty measures will be examined for prognostic utility, and radiotherapy and hospital records will be analysed to characterise bone-related treatments and skeletal complications.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval has been obtained from the East of England–Cambridge Central Research Ethics Committee, with Section251 support from the Health Research Authority on advice from the Confidentiality Advisory Group. Findings will be disseminated through publications, conference presentations and engagement with stakeholders and patient groups.

Trial registration

ISRCTN60123120, ISRCTN49407852, ISRCTN90889843, ISRCTN24989786, ISRCTN08577602, ISRCTN17354232,ISRCTN59395590, ISRCTN24593488, ISRCTN58227268, ISRCTN15028850.

Understanding the contextual and causal factors shaping the work of receptionists in general practice: a realist review protocol

Por: Hoverd · E. · Brown · M. E. L. · Burford · B. · Chen · K.-L. · Erfani · G. · Hassan · S. · Montgomery · A. · Lievesley · M. · Norton · J. · Owen-Boukra · E. C. · Rapley · T. · Roberts · N. · Sajid · M. · Sowden · S. · Steven · A. · Vance · G. · Park · S.
Background

The work of receptionists in general practice is evolving rapidly and becoming more complex due to a number of changes within primary and community care services, such as increased digitalisation. In under-served areas, these changes have been further complicated by under-resourcing and workforce challenges around staff recruitment and retention. The National Health Service (NHS) 10-year health plan is set to accelerate further significant changes. There is limited understanding about how and why these changes and workforce challenges are impacting and will impact the future work of receptionists in general practice in under-served areas.

Methods and analysis

This realist review will build on an existing programme theory related to general practitioner workforce sustainability. The review will examine what works, for whom, how and under what circumstances for receptionist work in general practice, in under-served areas. For example, how influences such as the expectations of patients (in under-served communities), poor staffing or limited career progression. Key stakeholders, including public contributors and individuals from general practice settings, will inform the realist review.

The review will be conducted using existing secondary and grey literature sources. The search strategy comprises five electronic databases: Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Web of Science Core Collection (SCIE, SSCI, AHCI) with a date limit of 2015 applied to the search. The review will follow Pawson’s five steps: (1) shaping the scope of the review; (2) searching for evidence; (3) document selection and appraisal; (4) data extraction and (5) data synthesis. The findings will be reported in accordance with the Realist and Meta-narrative Evidence Synthesis Evolving Standards.

Ethics and dissemination

Ethical approval is not needed for secondary analysis. The findings of this review will contribute to ongoing work as part of our ‘Workforce Voices’ programme of research. They will be disseminated to policymakers, commissioners, providers of health and social care and primary care and community healthcare teams through peer-reviewed publications, members of the public, conference presentations, social media and recommendations.

❌