RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Recruitment and retention are common challenges in clinical trials, particularly with older adults and their caregivers who often benefit from palliative care but have significant strain from caregiving. In recent years, there has been an expansion in home-based palliative care programs, especially for patients with dementia. Because these programs often rely on physicians or advanced practice nurses, they are quite costly and may be difficult to staff due to workforce shortages. METHODS: We created a novel program of home-based palliative care for patients with advanced dementia and their families, which centers around a community health worker, a social worker, and a nurse. We report on challenges our trial encountered and corresponding solutions. RESULTS: We enrolled 30 patients and their 30 caregivers in our pilot trial of home-based palliative care. We found two significant barriers to enrollment: (1) the electronic health record was insufficient to determine the severity of patients' dementia; and (2) rates of follow-up survey completion were low, with completion rates at 6 months between 14 and 44%. We created an iterative training process to determine dementia severity from electronic health records and applied person-centered approaches to improve survey completion. CONCLUSIONS: Electronic health records are not set up to include discrete fields for dementia severity, which makes enrollment of older adults with dementia in a clinical trial challenging. The strain of caring for a loved one with advanced dementia may also make participation in health-services research difficult for patients and their families. Novel approaches have the potential to counteract these challenges, improve recruitment and retention, and ultimately improve care for people with dementia and their caregivers.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: In response to a growing need for accessible, efficient, and effective palliative care services, we designed, implemented, and evaluated a novel palliative care at home (PC@H) model for people with serious illness that is centered around a community health worker, a registered nurse, and a social worker, with an advanced practice nurse and a physician for support. Our objectives were to measure the impact of receipt of PC@H on patient symptoms, quality of life, and healthcare utilization and costs. METHODS: We enrolled 136 patients with serious illness in this parallel, randomized controlled trial. Our primary outcome was change in symptom burden at 6 weeks. Secondary outcomes included change in symptom burden at 3 months, change in quality of life at 6 weeks and 3 months, estimated using a group t-test. In an exploratory aim, we examined the impact of PC@H on healthcare utilization and cost using a generalized linear model. RESULTS: PC@H resulted in a greater improvement in patient symptoms at 6 weeks (1.30 score improvement, n = 37) and 3 months (3.14 score improvement, n = 21) compared with controls. There were no differences in healthcare utilization and costs between the two groups. Unfortunately, due to the COVID-19 pandemic and a loss of funding, the trial was not able to be completed as originally intended. CONCLUSIONS: A palliative care at home model that leverages community health workers, registered nurses, and social workers as the primary deliverers of care may result in improved patient symptoms and quality of life compared with standard care. We did not demonstrate significant differences in healthcare utilization and cost associated with receipt of PC@H, likely due to inability to reach the intended sample size and insufficient statistical power, due to elements beyond the investigators' control such as the COVID-19 public health emergency and changes in grant funding.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Cockroaches and mice, which are common in urban homes, are sources of allergens capable of triggering asthma symptoms. Traditional pest control involves the use of scheduled applications of pesticides by professionals as well as pesticide use by residents. In contrast, integrated pest management (IPM) involves sanitation, building maintenance, and limited use of least toxic pesticides. OBJECTIVES: We implemented and evaluated IPM compared with traditional practice for its impact on pests, allergens, pesticide use, and resident satisfaction in a large urban public housing authority. METHODS: We assigned IPM or control status to 13 buildings in five housing developments, and evaluated conditions at baseline, 3 months, and 6 months in 280 apartments in Brooklyn and Manhattan, in New York City (New York). We measured cockroach and mouse populations, collected cockroach and mouse urinary protein allergens in dust, and interviewed residents. All statistical models controlled for baseline levels of pests or allergens. RESULTS: Compared with controls, apartments receiving IPM had significantly lower counts of cockroaches at 3 months and greater success in reducing or sustaining low counts of cockroaches at both 3 and 6 months. IPM was associated with lower cockroach allergen levels in kitchens at 3 months and in beds and kitchens at 6 months. Pesticide use was reduced in IPM relative to control apartments. Residents of IPM apartments also rated building services more positively. CONCLUSIONS: In contrast to previous IPM studies, which involved extensive cleaning, repeat visits, and often extensive resident education, we found that an easily replicable single IPM visit was more effective than the regular application of pesticides alone in managing pests and their consequences.