4.5 Article

Delivery Strategies to Optimize Resource Utilization and Performance Status for Patients With Advanced Life-Limiting Illness: Results From the Palliative Care Trial [ISRCTN 81117481]

期刊

JOURNAL OF PAIN AND SYMPTOM MANAGEMENT
卷 45, 期 3, 页码 488-505

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2012.02.024

关键词

Palliative care; case conference; specialized palliative care; evidence-based service delivery model; adult; pain; patient and caregiver education; physician education; hospice

资金

  1. Rural Health and Palliative Care Branch of the Australian Department of Health and Ageing (Canberra, Australia)
  2. Ian Potter Foundation
  3. Cancer Council South Australia
  4. Doris Duke Charitable Foundation (New York, NY)
  5. Australian Department of Health and Ageing (Canberra, Australia)
  6. Repatriation General Hospital (Daw Park, Australia)
  7. ACH (Aged Care & Housing) Group, Inc. (Adelaide, Australia)
  8. Southern Division of General Practice (Bedford Park, Australia)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Context. Evidence-based approaches are needed to improve the delivery of specialized palliative care. Objectives. The aim of this trial was to improve on current models of service provision. Methods. This 2 x 2 x 2 factorial cluster randomized controlled trial was conducted at an Australian community-based palliative care service, allowing three simultaneous comparative effectiveness studies. Participating patients were newly referred adults, experiencing pain, and who were expected to live >48 hours. Patients enrolled with their general practitioners (GPs) and were randomized three times: 1) individualized interdisciplinary case conference including their GP vs. control, 2) educational outreach visiting for GPs about pain management vs. control, and 3) structured educational visiting for patients/caregivers about pain management vs. control. The control condition was current palliative care. Outcomes included Australia-modified Karnofsky Performance Status (AKPS) and pain from 60 days after randomization and hospitalizations. Results. There were 461 participants: mean age 71 years, 50% male, 91% with cancer, median survival 179 days, and median baseline AKPS 60. Only 47% of individuals randomized to the case conferencing intervention received it; based on a priori-defined analyses, 32% of participants were included in final analyses. Case conferencing reduced hospitalizations by 26% (least squares means hospitalizations per patient: case conference 1.26 [SE 0.10] vs. control 1.70 [SE 0.13], P = 0.0069) and better maintained performance status (AKPS case conferences 57.3 [SE 1.5] vs. control 51.7 [SE 2.3], P = 0.0368). Among patients with declining function (AKPS <70), case conferencing and patient/caregiver education better maintained performance status (AKPS case conferences 55.0 [SE 2.1] vs. control 46.5 [SE 2.9], P = 0.0143; patient/caregiver education 54.7 [SE 2.8] vs. control 46.8 [SE 2.1], P = 0.0206). Pain was unchanged. GP education did not change outcomes. Conclusion. A single case conference added to current specialized community-based palliative care reduced hospitalizations and better maintained performance status. Comparatively, patient/caregiver education was less effective; GP education was not effective. J Pain Symptom Manage 2013;45:488e505. (C) 2013 U.S. Cancer Pain Relief Committee. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.5
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据