1. Pilot Testing of a Nurse-Led Basic Symptom Self-management Support for Patients Receiving First-Line Systemic Outpatient Anticancer Treatment: A Cluster-Randomized Study (Symptom Navi Pilot Study)
- Author
-
Karin Ribi, Marika Bana, Daniel Betticher, Barbara Stoffel, Manuela Eicher, Nathan Cantoni, Trudy Kuhn-Bächler, Rebecca Biber, Solange Peters, Sabin Zürcher-Florin, Diana Malin, Thomas Seeger, Markus Borner, Cornelia Blaeuer, Lukas Bütikofer, Susanne Kropf-Staub, and E. Näf
- Subjects
Adult ,medicine.medical_specialty ,Self-management ,Oncology (nursing) ,business.industry ,Self-Management ,Pilot Projects ,Disease cluster ,Nurse's Role ,Self Efficacy ,Confidence interval ,law.invention ,Patient safety ,Oncology ,Randomized controlled trial ,law ,Intervention (counseling) ,Internal medicine ,Outpatients ,Humans ,Medicine ,SNP ,Adverse effect ,business ,610 Medicine & health - Abstract
BACKGROUND The Symptom Navi Program (SNP) is a nurse-led intervention supporting basic symptom self-management for patients with any cancer diagnosis. The SNP has been accepted by patients and healthcare professionals alike. OBJECTIVE The aims of this study were to pilot the SNP and evaluate patient-reported symptom outcomes, nursing support for symptom management, and patient safety. METHODS Using a cluster-randomized design, we randomized centers to the intervention (SNP) or control group (usual care). Adult patients starting first-line systemic cancer treatment were included. The primary outcome was the change in symptom interference with daily functions from treatment onset to 16 weeks. Secondary outcomes included changes in symptom severity, symptom burden, self-efficacy, and perceived symptom management support and patient safety. We used linear and logistic mixed-effects models to pilot-test differences in mean changes between groups. The trial was registered with ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03649984). RESULTS Changes in symptom interference with daily functions did not differ (mean difference at 16 weeks: -0.50; 95% confidence interval, -1.38 to 0.38; P = 0.25) between SNP (3 centers, 49 patients) and control (5 centers, 85 patients) as for all other outcomes. No adverse events were reported. CONCLUSIONS Our preliminary findings did not indicate an effect of the SNP on patient-reported symptom outcomes, self-efficacy, or symptom management support. Inadequate power and SNP components (eg, insufficient training, low number of follow-up consultations) may be attributed to the lack of an observed effect. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE The SNP training content and intervention procedures merit reconsideration.
- Published
- 2021
- Full Text
- View/download PDF