Search

Background: Breathlessness is the most common and intrusive symptom of advanced non-malignant respiratory and cardiac conditions. The Breathlessness Intervention Service (BIS) is a multi-disciplinary complex intervention, theoretically underpinned by a palliative care approach, utilising evidence-based non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions to support patients with advanced disease in managing their breathlessness. Having published the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of BIS for patients with advanced cancer and their carers, we sought to establish its effectiveness, and cost effectiveness, in advanced non-malignant conditions., Methods: This was a single-centre Phase III fast-track single-blind mixed method RCT of BIS versus standard care for breathless patients with non-malignant conditions and their carers. Randomisation was to one of two groups (randomly permuted blocks). Eighty-seven patients referred to BIS were randomised (intervention arm n = 44; control arm n = 43 received BIS after four-week wait); 79 (91 %) completed to key outcome measurement. The primary outcome measure was 0-10 numeric rating scale for patient distress due to breathlessness at four weeks. Secondary outcome measures were Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Client Service Receipt Inventory, EQ-5D and topic-guided interviews., Results: Qualitative analyses showed the positive impact of BIS on patients with non-malignant conditions and their carers; quantitative analyses showed a non-significant greater reduction in the primary outcome ('distress due to breathlessness'), when compared to standard care, of -0.24 (95 % CI: -1.30, 0.82). BIS resulted in extra mean costs of £799, reducing to £100 when outliers were excluded; neither difference was statistically significant. The quantitative findings contrasted with those previously reported for patients with cancer and their carers, which showed BIS to be both clinically and cost effective. For patients with non-malignant conditions there was a notable trend of improvement over both trial arms to the key measurement point; participants may have experienced a therapeutic effect from the research interviews, diluting the intervention's impact., Conclusions: BIS had a statistically non-significant effect for patients with non-malignant conditions, and slightly increased service costs, but had a qualitatively positive impact consistent with findings for advanced cancer. Trials of palliative care interventions should consider multiple, mixed method, primary outcomes and ensure that protocols limit potential contaminating therapeutic effects in study designs., Trial Registration: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN04119516 (December 2008); ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00678405 (May 2008).

Background: There is little guidance on the particular ethical concerns that research raises with a palliative care population., Aim: To present the process and outcomes of a workshop and consensus exercise on agreed best practice to accommodate ethical issues in research on palliative care., Design: Consultation workshop using the MORECare Transparent Expert Consultation approach. Prior to workshops, participants were sent overviews of ethical issues in palliative care. Following the workshop, nominal group techniques were used to produce candidate recommendations. These were rated online by participating experts. Descriptive statistics were used to analyse agreement and consensus. Narrative comments were collated., Setting/participants: Experts in ethical issues and palliative care research were invited to the Cicely Saunders Institute in London. They included senior researchers, service providers, commissioners, researchers, members of ethics committees and policy makers., Results: The workshop comprised 28 participants. A total of 16 recommendations were developed. There was high agreement on the issue of research participation and high to moderate agreement on applications to research ethics committees. The recommendations on obtaining and maintaining consent from patients and families were the most contentious. Nine recommendations were refined on the basis of the comments from the online consultation., Conclusions: The culture surrounding palliative care research needs to change by fostering collaborative approaches between all those involved in the research process. Changes to the legal framework governing the research process are required to enhance the ethical conduct of research in palliative care. The recommendations are relevant to all areas of research involving vulnerable adults.

Background: Statistical analysis in palliative and end-of-life care research can be problematic due to high levels of missing data, attrition and response shift as disease progresses., Aim: To develop recommendations about managing missing data, attrition and response shift in palliative and end-of-life care research data., Design: We used the MORECare Transparent Expert Consultation approach to conduct a consultation workshop with experts in statistical methods in palliative and end-of-life care research. Following presentations and discussion, nominal group techniques were used to produce recommendations about attrition, missing data and response shift. These were rated online by experts and analysed using descriptive statistics for consensus and importance., Results: In total, 20 participants attended the workshop and 19 recommendations were subsequently ranked. There was broad agreement across recommendations. The top five recommendations were as follows: A taxonomy should be devised to define types of attrition. Types and amount of missing data should be reported with details of imputation methods. The pattern of missing data should be investigated to inform the imputation approach. A statistical analysis plan should be pre-specified in the protocol. High rates of attrition should be assumed when planning studies and specifying analyses. The leading recommendation for response shift was for more research., Conclusions: When designing studies in palliative and end-of-life care, it is recommended that high rates of attrition should not be seen as indicative of poor design and that a clear statistical analysis plan is in place to account for missing data and attrition.

Background: Older patients are less likely to receive palliative care than younger patients. As patient and primary carer age correlate positively, patterns may be due to carer rather than patient age, and reflect better ability to obtain support among younger carers., Objective: To investigate how both patient and carer age relate to palliative care use, controlling for relevant variables., Design: Comparison of patients who received community Macmillan nurse specialist advice, Marie Curie nursing or inpatient hospice care with patients who did not, using univariate analysis and multivariate logistic regression. Patient and carer data were collected through electronic service record linkage and carer post-bereavement interviews., Sample: patients referred to a hospice at home service whose primary carer could be interviewed (n = 123)., Results: Whilst a cancer diagnosis was an important determinant of access for all services considered, logistic regression shows that carer age, but not patient age, and hospice at home access predicted Marie Curie nursing use. Both patient and carer age predicted use of Macmillan nurse advice. Age of the patient, but not carer age, predicted admission to inpatient hospice, alongside requiring care for over a month (all P < 0.05)., Conclusions: Carer age may be as important a predictor of palliative home care use as patient age. We need to investigate whether younger carers have greater support needs or show greater effectiveness in obtaining help and to assess whether older carers need more assistance in recruitment of support.

Background: most people in contemporary western society die of the chronic diseases of old age. Whilst palliative care is appropriate for elderly patients with chronic, non-malignant disease, few of these patients access such care compared with cancer patients. Objective referral criteria based on accurate estimation of survival may facilitate more timely referral of non-cancer patients most appropriate for specialist palliative care., Objective: to identify tools and predictor variables that might aid clinicians estimate survival and assess palliative status in non-cancer patients aged 65 years and older., Methods: systematic review and quality assessment using criteria modified from the literature., Results: 11 studies that evaluated prognoses in hospitalised and community-based older adults with non-malignant disease were identified. Key generic predictors of survival were increased dependency of activities of daily living, presence of comorbidities, poor nutritional status and weight loss, and abnormal vital signs and laboratory values. Disease-specific predictors of survival were identified for dementia, chronic obstructive pulmonary disorder and congestive heart failure. No study evaluated the relationship between survival and palliative status., Conclusion: prognostic models that attempt to estimate survival of < or = 6 months in non-cancer patients have generally poor discrimination, reflecting the unpredictable nature of most non-malignant disease. However, a number of generic and disease-specific predictor variables were identified that may help clinicians identify older, non-cancer patients with poor prognoses and palliative care needs. Simple, well-validated prognostic models that provide clinicians with objective measures of palliative status in non-cancer patients are needed. Additionally, research that evaluates the effect of general and specialist palliative care on psychosocial outcomes in non-cancer patients and their carers is needed.

Selecting an appropriate research strategy is key to ensuring that research questions are addressed in a way which has value and is congruent with the overall topic, questions and purpose of the research. This paper will argue that there are situations when a case study strategy is appropriate to use in palliative care research. These include: when complex situations need to be addressed; when context is central to the study; when multiple perspectives need to be recognized; when the design needs to be flexible; when the research needs to be congruent with clinical practice; when there is no strong theory to which to appeal; and when other methodologies could be difficult to conduct. Using case study strategies rigorously and appropriately can contribute to knowledge in a way which is sensitive to the complex, context-dependent and multiprofessional nature of palliative care.

Background: Informal carers provide the bulk of palliative home care. They largely rely on general practitioners (GPs) and district nurses to support them in this role, yet little is known about what carers themselves consider important in this support., Aim: To identify what informal carers valued in the palliative support provided by GPs and district nurses by using carers' own descriptions of such support., Design of Study: Retrospective interviews., Setting: Primary care in Cambridgeshire., Method: Semi-structured interviews with bereaved carers of 48 patients with cancer and 12 patients with non-cancer diagnoses. Content analysis of carers' evaluative descriptions of GP and district nurse support., Results: The accessibility of the GP and district nurse emerged as the most important aspect of support. Enlistment of help from other agencies was also extensively mentioned, together with provision of equipment. Attitude or approach during interactions, and relationship with the professional were important, particularly regarding GP support, whereas support for the carer, information, and symptom control were mentioned less often. Data suggested that support was not as good for older patients (> or =75 years), but this finding requires further investigation., Conclusion: Results largely confirmed findings of previous, quantitative research and the importance of a patient-centred approach. What emerged most strongly, however, was the central importance of accessibility of support services for lay carers responsible for end-of-life home care. This mainly concerned GP and district nurse support, but accessibility of additional care and equipment were also important. In short, carers' main focus was the basic support that enabled them to sustain care in the home.