Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/2440/106193
Citations
Scopus Web of Science® Altmetric
?
?
Type: Journal article
Title: Delivery strategies to optimize resource utilization and performance status for patients with advanced life-limiting illness: results from the "palliative care trial" [ISRCTN 81117481]
Author: Abernethy, A.
Currow, D.
Shelby-James, T.
Rowett, D.
May, F.
Samsa, G.
Hunt, R.
Williams, H.
Esterman, A.
Phillips, P.
Citation: Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 2013; 45(3):488-505
Publisher: Elsevier
Issue Date: 2013
ISSN: 0885-3924
1873-6513
Statement of
Responsibility: 
Amy P. Abernethy, David C. Currow, Tania Shelby-James, Debra Rowett, Frank May, Gregory P. Samsa, Roger Hunt, Helena Williams, Adrian Esterman, Paddy A. Phillips
Abstract: 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 2×2×2 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.
Keywords: Palliative care; case conference; specialized palliative care; evidence-based service delivery model; adult; pain; patient and caregiver education; physician education; hospice
Rights: Copyright © 2013 U.S. Cancer Pain Relief Committee. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2012.02.024
Appears in Collections:Aurora harvest 8
Public Health publications

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.