Association of two geriatric treatment systems with anti-osteoporotic drug treatment and second hip fracture in patients with an index hip fracture: retrospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: In Germany, geriatricians deliver acute geriatric care during acute hospital stay and post-acute rehabilitation after transfer to a rehabilitation clinic. The rate patients receive acute geriatric care (AGC) or are transferred to post-acute rehabilitation (TPR) differs between hospitals. This study analyses the association between the two geriatric treatment systems (AGC, TPR) and second hip fracture in patients following an index hip fracture. METHODS: Nationwide health insurance data are used to identify the rate of AGC and TPR per hospital following hip fracture surgery in patients aged ≥ 80 years. Outcomes are a second hip fracture after surgery or after discharge within 180 or 360 days and new specific anti-osteoporotic drugs. Cox proportional hazard models and generalised linear models are applied. RESULTS: Data from 29,096 hip fracture patients from 652 hospitals were analysed. AGC and TPR are not associated with second hip fracture when follow-up started after surgery. However, during the first months after discharge patients from hospitals with no AGC or low rates of TPR have higher rates of second hip fracture than patients from hospitals with high rates of AGC or high rates of TPR (Hazard Ratio (95% CI) 1.35 (1.01-1.80) or 1.35 (1.03-1.79), respectively). Lower rates of AGC are associated with lower probabilities of new prescriptions of specific anti-osteoporotic drugs. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests beneficial relationships of geriatric treatment after hip fracture with a) the risk of second hip fractures during the first months after discharge and b) an improvement of anti-osteoporotic drug treatment.

Rehabilitation interventions to modify physical frailty in adults before lung transplantation: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Lung transplantation is the gold-standard treatment for end-stage lung disease for a small group of patients meeting strict acceptance criteria after optimal medical management has failed. Physical frailty is prevalent in lung transplant candidates and has been linked to worse outcomes both on the waiting list and postoperatively. Exercise has been proven to be beneficial in optimising exercise capacity and quality of life in lung transplant candidates, but its impact on physical frailty is unknown. This review aims to assess the effectiveness of exercise interventions in modifying physical frailty for adults awaiting lung transplantation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This protocol was prospectively registered on the PROSPERO database. We will search four databases plus trial registries to identify primary studies of adult candidates for lung transplantation undertaking exercise interventions and assessing outcomes pertaining to physical frailty. Studies must include at least 10 participants. Article screening will be performed by two researchers independently at each stage. Extraction will be performed by one reviewer and checked by a second. The risk of bias in studies will be assessed by two independent reviewers using tools appropriate for the research design of each study; where appropriate, we will use Cochrane Risk of Bias 2 or ROBINS-I. At each stage of the review process, discrepancies will be resolved through a consensus or consultation with a third reviewer. Meta-analyses of frailty outcomes will be performed if possible and appropriate as will prespecified subgroup and sensitivity analyses. Where we are unable to perform meta-analysis, we will conduct narrative synthesis following Synthesis without Meta-analysis guidance. The review will be reported using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethical issues are predicted due to the nature of this study. Dissemination will occur via conference abstracts, professional networks, peer-reviewed journals and patient support groups. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022363730.

Barriers to and Facilitators of Older People's Engagement With Web-Based Services: Qualitative Study of Adults Aged >75 Years.

BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has accelerated the shift toward the digital provision of many public services, including health and social care, public administration, and financial and leisure services. COVID-19 services including test appointments, results, vaccination appointments and more were primarily delivered through digital channels to the public. Many social, cultural, and economic activities (appointments, ticket bookings, tax and utility payments, shopping, etc) have transitioned to web-based platforms. To use web-based public services, individuals must be digitally included. This is influenced by 3 main factors: access (whether individuals have access to the internet), ability (having the requisite skills and confidence to participate over the web), and affordability (ability to pay for infrastructure [equipment] and data packages). Many older adults, especially those aged >75 years, are still digitally excluded. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to explore the views of adults aged >75 years on accessing public services digitally. METHODS: We conducted semistructured qualitative interviews with a variety of adults aged ≥75 years residing in Greater Manchester, United Kingdom. We also interviewed community support workers. Thematic analysis was used to identify the key themes from the data. RESULTS: Overall, 24 older adults (mean age 81, SD 4.54 y; 14/24, 58% female; 23/24, 96% White British; and 18/24, 75% digitally engaged to some extent) and 2 support workers participated. A total of five themes were identified as key in understanding issues around motivation, engagement, and participation: (1) "initial motivation to participate digitally"-for example, maintaining social connections and gaining skills to be able to connect with family and friends; (2) "narrow use and restricted activity on the web"-undertaking limited tasks on the web and in a modified manner, for example, limited use of web-based public services and selected use of specific services, such as checking but never transferring funds during web-based banking; (3) "impact of digital participation on well-being"-choosing to go to the shops or general practitioner's surgery to get out of the house and get some exercise; (4) "the last generation?"-respondents feeling that there were generational barriers to adapting to new technology and change; and (5) "making digital accessible"-understanding the support needed to keep those engaged on the web. CONCLUSIONS: As we transition toward greater digitalization of public services, it is crucial to incorporate the perspectives of older people. Failing to do so risks excluding them from accessing services they greatly rely on and need.

Unrepresented, unheard and discriminated against: A qualitative exploration of relatives' and professionals' views of palliative care experiences of people of African and Caribbean descent during the COVID-19 pandemic.

BACKGROUND: People of African and Caribbean descent experienced disproportionately high mortality from COVID-19 and have poor access to palliative care. AIM: To explore palliative care experiences of people of African and Caribbean descent during and immediately prior to the pandemic. DESIGN: Qualitative interview study with thematic analysis. Refinement of themes/recommendations in consultation with an expert patient and public advisory group. SETTING/PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-six bereaved relatives and 13 health/social care professionals (cared for people of African and Caribbean descent) from throughout England, recruited using social media, community networks and direct advertising to over 150 organisations. RESULTS: Three themes were identified: Representation: Participants did not see themselves reflected in the palliative care services and did not expect their needs to be understood. Mistrust of the healthcare system and perceptions of racism were common and led to anticipation of inequitable care. Personalisation: Relatives and professionals reported a lack of cultural and religious sensitivity in healthcare. Assumptions were made based on ethnicity, and services not offered to all. Awareness and education: Professionals felt they lacked the knowledge to provide care to diverse communities, but were reluctant to ask, due to fear of making mistakes. Inequitable access to services was exacerbated by, but not unique to, the pandemic. Participants recommended raising awareness of palliative services, building professional competence in culturally-sensitive care, and greater ethnic diversity within services. CONCLUSIONS: Person-centred, culturally-competent palliative care is not the norm for people of African and Caribbean descent. Expectations of inequitable care are widespread. Sustained action on multiple fronts is needed.

Household wealth, neighbourhood deprivation and frailty amongst middle-aged and older adults in England: a longitudinal analysis over 15 years (2002-2017).

BACKGROUND: frailty is a condition of reduced function and health due to ageing processes and is associated with a higher risk of falls, hospitalisation, disability and mortality. OBJECTIVE: to determine the relationship between household wealth and neighbourhood deprivation with frailty status, independently of demographic factors, educational attainment and health behaviours. DESIGN: population-based cohort study. SETTING: communities in England. SUBJECTS: in total 17,438 adults aged 50+ from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing. METHODS: multilevel mixed-effects ordered logistic regression was used in this study. Frailty was measured using a frailty index. We defined small geographic areas (neighbourhoods) using English Lower layer Super Output Areas. Neighbourhood deprivation was measured by the English Index of Multiple Deprivation, grouped into quintiles. Health behaviours included in this study are smoking and frequency of alcohol consumption. RESULTS: the proportion of respondents who were prefrail and frail were 33.8% [95% confidence interval (CI) 33.0-34.6%] and 11.7 (11.1-12.2)%, respectively. Participants in the lowest wealth quintile and living in the most deprived neighbourhood quintile had 1.3 (95% CI = 1.2-1.3) and 2.2 (95% CI = 2.1-2.4) times higher odds of being prefrail and frail, respectively, than the wealthiest participants living in the least deprived neighbourhoods Living in more deprived neighbourhood and poorer wealth was associated with an increased risk of becoming frail. Those inequalities did not change over time. CONCLUSIONS: in this population-based sample, living in a deprived area or having low wealth was associated with frailty in middle-aged and older adults. This relationship was independent of the effects of individual demographic characteristics and health behaviours.

Association of two geriatric treatment systems on care home admission and mortality in patients with hip fracture.

BACKGROUND: In Germany, geriatricians deliver acute geriatric care during an acute hospital stay and subacute rehabilitation after transfer to a rehabilitation clinic. However, the proportion of patients who receive acute geriatric care (AGC) or are transferred to subacute rehabilitation (TSR) differs considerably between hospitals. The aim of this study was to analyse the association between the two geriatric treatment systems and care home admission or mortality in patients following hip fracture. METHODS: Health insurance claims data were used to identify the rate of AGC per hospital and the rate of TSR per hospital following hip fracture surgery in patients aged ≥ 80 years. Outcomes were cumulative admission to a care home and cumulative mortality within 6 months after hospital admission. RESULTS: Data from 23,046 hip fracture patients from 561 hospitals were analysed. The rate of AGC was not associated with care home admission. However, compared to high rates of AGC medium rates or no AGC were associated with increased death rates by 12% or 20%, respectively. Treatment in hospitals with low rates of TSR was associated with a 8% higher risk of care home admission and a 10% increased risk of death compared to treatment in hospitals with high rates of TSR. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests potential effects of geriatric treatment: reduction of mortality in hospitals with high rates of AGC or reduction of care home admission and mortality in hospitals with high rates of TSR.

The accuracy of clinician predictions of survival in the Prognosis in Palliative care Study II (PiPS2): A prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: Prognostic information is important for patients with cancer, their families, and clinicians. In practice, survival predictions are made by clinicians based on their experience, judgement, and intuition. Previous studies have reported that clinicians' survival predictions are often inaccurate. This study reports a secondary analysis of data from the Prognosis in Palliative care Study II (PiPS2) to assess the accuracy of survival estimates made by doctors and nurses. METHODS AND FINDINGS: Adult patients (n = 1833) with incurable, locally advanced or metastatic cancer, recently referred to palliative care services (community teams, hospital teams, and inpatient palliative care units) were recruited. Doctors (n = 431) and nurses (n = 777) provided independent prognostic predictions and an agreed multi-professional prediction for each patient. Clinicians provided prognostic estimates in several formats including predictions about length of survival and probability of surviving to certain time points. There was a minimum follow up of three months or until death (whichever was sooner; maximum follow-up 783 days). Agreed multi-professional predictions about whether patients would survive for days, weeks or months+ were accurate on 61.9% of occasions. The positive predictive value of clinicians' predictions about imminent death (within one week) was 77% for doctors and 79% for nurses. The sensitivity of these predictions was low (37% and 35% respectively). Specific predictions about how many weeks patients would survive were not very accurate but showed good discrimination (patients estimated to survive for shorted periods had worse outcomes). The accuracy of clinicians' probabilistic predictions (assessed using Brier's scores) was consistently better than chance, improved with proximity to death and showed good discrimination between groups of patients with different survival outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Using a variety of different approaches, this study found that clinicians predictions of survival show good discrimination and accuracy, regardless of whether the predictions are about how long or how likely patients are to survive. Accuracy improves with proximity to death. Although the positive predictive value of estimates of imminent death are relatively high, the sensitivity of such predictions is relatively low. Despite limitations, the clinical prediction of survival should remain the benchmark against which any innovations in prognostication are judged. STUDY REGISTRATION: ISRCTN13688211. http://www.isrctn.com/ISRCTN13688211.

Identifying older adults with frailty approaching end-of-life: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: People with frailty may have specific needs for end-of-life care, but there is no consensus on how to identify these people in a timely way, or whether they will benefit from intervention. AIM: To synthesise evidence on identification of older people with frailty approaching end-of-life, and whether associated intervention improves outcomes. DESIGN: Systematic review (PROSPERO: CRD42020462624). DATA SOURCES: Six databases were searched, with no date restrictions, for articles reporting prognostic or intervention studies. Key inclusion criteria were adults aged 65 and over, identified as frail via an established measure. End-of-life was defined as the final 12 months. Key exclusion criteria were proxy definitions of frailty, or studies involving people with cancer, even if also frail. RESULTS: Three articles met the inclusion criteria. Strongest evidence came from one study in English primary care, which showed distinct trajectories in electronic Frailty Index scores in the last 12 months of life, associated with increased risk of death. We found no studies evaluating established clinical tools (e.g. Gold Standards Framework) with existing frail populations. We found no intervention studies; the literature on advance care planning with people with frailty has relied on proxy definitions of frailty. CONCLUSION: Clear implications for policy and practice are hindered by the lack of studies using an established approach to assessing frailty. Future end-of-life research needs to use explicit approaches to the measurement and reporting of frailty, and address the evidence gap on interventions. A focus on models of care that incorporate a palliative approach is essential.

Study recruitment factors in advanced cancer: the Prognosis in Palliative care Study II (PiPS2) - a multicentre, prospective, observational cohort project.

OBJECTIVES: The Prognosis in Palliative care Study II (PiPS2) was a large multicentre observational study validating prognostic tools in patients with advanced cancer. Many palliative care studies fail to reach their recruitment target. To inform future studies, PiPS2 rigorously monitored and identified any potential recruitment barriers. METHODS: Key recruitment stages (ie, whether patients were eligible for the study, approached by the researchers and whether consent was obtained for enrolment) were monitored via comprehensive screening logs at participating sites (inpatient hospices, hospitals and community palliative care teams). The reasons for patients' ineligibility, inaccessibility or decision not to consent were documented. RESULTS: 17 014 patients were screened across 27 participating sites over a 20-month recruitment period. Of those, 4642 (27%) were ineligible for participation in the study primarily due to non-cancer diagnoses. Of 12 372 eligible patients, 9073 (73%) were not approached, the most common reason being a clinical decision not to do so. Other reasons included patients' death or discharge before they were approached by the researchers. Of the 3299 approached patients, 1458 (44%) declined participation mainly because of feeling too unwell, experiencing severe distress or having other competing priorities. 11% (n=1841/17 014) of patients screened were enrolled in the study, representing 15% (n=1841/12 372) of eligible patients. Different recruitment patterns were observed across inpatient hospice, hospital and community palliative care teams. CONCLUSIONS: The main barrier to recruitment was 'accessing' potentially eligible patients. Monitoring key recruitment stages may help to identify barriers and facilitators to enrolment and allow results to be put into better context. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ISRCTN13688211.

Prognostic models of survival in patients with advanced incurable cancer: the PiPS2 observational study.

BACKGROUND: The Prognosis in Palliative care Study (PiPS) prognostic survival models predict survival in patients with incurable cancer. PiPS-A (Prognosis in Palliative care Study - All), which involved clinical observations only, and PiPS-B (Prognosis in Palliative care Study - Blood), which additionally required blood test results, consist of 14- and 56-day models that combine to create survival risk categories: 'days', 'weeks' and 'months+'. OBJECTIVES: The primary objectives were to compare PIPS-B risk categories against agreed multiprofessional estimates of survival and to validate PiPS-A and PiPS-B. The secondary objectives were to validate other prognostic models, to assess the acceptability of the models to patients, carers and health-care professionals and to identify barriers to and facilitators of clinical use. DESIGN: This was a national, multicentre, prospective, observational, cohort study with a nested qualitative substudy using interviews with patients, carers and health-care professionals. SETTING: Community, hospital and hospice palliative care services across England and Wales. PARTICIPANTS: For the validation study, the participants were adults with incurable cancer, with or without capacity to consent, who had been recently referred to palliative care services and had sufficient English language. For the qualitative substudy, a subset of participants in the validation study took part, along with informal carers, patients who declined to participate in the main study and health-care professionals. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: For the validation study, the primary outcomes were survival, clinical prediction of survival and PiPS-B risk category predictions. The secondary outcomes were predictions of PiPS-A and other prognostic models. For the qualitative substudy, the main outcomes were participants' views about prognostication and the use of prognostic models. RESULTS: For the validation study, 1833 participants were recruited. PiPS-B risk categories were as accurate as agreed multiprofessional estimates of survival (61%; p = 0.851). Discrimination of the PiPS-B 14-day model (c-statistic 0.837, 95% confidence interval 0.810 to 0.863) and the PiPS-B 56-day model (c-statistic 0.810, 95% confidence interval 0.788 to 0.832) was excellent. The PiPS-B 14-day model showed some overfitting (calibration in the large -0.202, 95% confidence interval -0.364 to -0.039; calibration slope 0.840, 95% confidence interval 0.730 to 0.950). The PiPS-B 56-day model was well-calibrated (calibration in the large 0.152, 95% confidence interval 0.030 to 0.273; calibration slope 0.914, 95% confidence interval 0.808 to 1.02). PiPS-A risk categories were less accurate than agreed multiprofessional estimates of survival (p < 0.001). The PiPS-A 14-day model (c-statistic 0.825, 95% confidence interval 0.803 to 0.848; calibration in the large -0.037, 95% confidence interval -0.168 to 0.095; calibration slope 0.981, 95% confidence interval 0.872 to 1.09) and the PiPS-A 56-day model (c-statistic 0.776, 95% confidence interval 0.755 to 0.797; calibration in the large 0.109, 95% confidence interval 0.002 to 0.215; calibration slope 0.946, 95% confidence interval 0.842 to 1.05) had excellent or reasonably good discrimination and calibration. Other prognostic models were also validated. Where comparisons were possible, the other prognostic models performed less well than PiPS-B. For the qualitative substudy, 32 health-care professionals, 29 patients and 20 carers were interviewed. The majority of patients and carers expressed a desire for prognostic information and said that PiPS could be helpful. Health-care professionals said that PiPS was user friendly and may be helpful for decision-making and care-planning. The need for a blood test for PiPS-B was considered a limitation. LIMITATIONS: The results may not be generalisable to other populations. CONCLUSIONS: PiPS-B risk categories are as accurate as agreed multiprofessional estimates of survival. PiPS-A categories are less accurate. Patients, carers and health-care professionals regard PiPS as potentially helpful in clinical practice. FUTURE WORK: A study to evaluate the impact of introducing PiPS into routine clinical practice is needed. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN13688211. FUNDING: This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme and will be published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 25, No. 28. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

A prognosis is a prediction about how long someone will live after a diagnosis of illness. The Prognosis in Palliative care Study (PiPS) tools [PiPS-A (Prognosis in Palliative care Study ­ All) and PiPS-B (Prognosis in Palliative care Study ­ Blood), respectively] were designed to predict survival in patients with incurable cancer. Previously, they were found to be as accurate as health-care professionals. The purpose of this study was to find out whether PiPS was more accurate at prognosticating than health-care professionals, to evaluate other prognostic tools and to ask patients, their carers and health-care professionals what they thought about using them. We studied 1833 patients with advanced cancer and calculated their PiPS score and other prognostic scores. We asked health-care professionals to estimate how long the patients would live. We then followed up the patients to find out how long they actually lived and if the predictions made by health-care professionals were as accurate as the predictions made by the prognostic tools. We interviewed patients, their carers and health-care professionals to ask them what they thought about using these prognostic tools. We found that PiPS-B was as accurate as the combined wisdom of a doctor and a nurse at predicting whether patients would live for 'days', 'weeks' or 'months+'. We found that PiPS-A predictions were not as accurate as predictions made by health-care professionals. We found that (where direct comparisons could be made) PiPS-B was better than other prognostic tools. Finally, we found that patients, carers and health-care professionals thought that PiPS tools could be helpful in clinical practice because they would be less subjective than clinicians' intuition. This means that PiPS-B could be considered as a tool to support clinician predictions of survival and may lead to patients and families being able to take more control at the end of their lives. Further research will be required to investigate whether or not this approach actually leads to improvements in care.

Systematic Review of Behaviour Change Theories Implementation in Dietary Interventions for People Who Have Survived Cancer.

BACKGROUND: An increasing number of dietary interventions for cancer survivors have been based on the behaviour change theory framework. The purpose of this study is to review the use and implementation of behaviour change theories in dietary interventions for people after cancer and assess their effects on the reported outcomes. METHODS: The search strategy from a Cochrane review on dietary interventions for cancer survivors was expanded to incorporate an additional criterion on the use of behaviour change theory and updated to September 2020. Randomised controlled trials (RCT) testing a dietary intervention compared to the control were included. Standard Cochrane methodological procedures were used. RESULTS: Nineteen RCTs, with 6261 participants (age range 44.6 to 73.1 years), were included in the review. The Social Cognitive Theory was the most frequently used theory (15 studies, 79%). Studies included between 4 to 17 behaviour change techniques. Due to limited information on the mediators of intervention and large heterogeneity between studies, no meta-analyses was conducted to assess which theoretical components of the interventions are effective. CONCLUSIONS: Whilst researchers have incorporated behaviour change theories into dietary interventions for cancer survivors, due to inconsistencies in design, evaluation and reporting, the effect of theories on survivors' outcomes remains unclear.

The longitudinal relationship between loneliness, social isolation, and frailty in older adults in England: a prospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is estimated that about 10% of people aged 65 and older are frail. Loneliness and social isolation are linked to increased mortality and poorer functional capacity. We assessed trends in frailty status associated with loneliness and social isolation over 14 years in a representative sample of English older adults. METHODS: In this longitudinal study, we used data from the English Longitudinal Study of Ageing (ELSA), which was designed to recruit a representative sample of adults aged 50 years and older living in private households in England. We analysed Waves 2-8 (covering June, 2004, to June, 2017). Frailty was defined using the frailty index, analysed continuously and as pre-specified categories, to categorise individuals as being non-frail (≤0·08), pre-frail (>0·08 to <0·25), or frail (≥0·25 to 1·00). Loneliness was measured using the UCLA 3-item Loneliness Scale and social isolation was measured following a previous ELSA approach, and both sets of scores were categorised into low, medium, or high. Linear mixed methods and Cox proportional hazard modelling were used, adjusted for confounders. FINDINGS: The study sample consisted of 9171 participants at the baseline of Wave 2 (4083 male and 5088 female), with similar numbers in subsequent waves. In the fixed effect model, adjusted for marital status, age, gender, wealth, and smoking status, respondents with higher levels of loneliness had a higher frailty index score (ß coefficient 0·006, 95% CI 0·006 to 0·007; p<0·0001), as did those with a higher level of social isolation (ß 0·002, <0·001 to 0·002; p<0·0001). Increasing age was associated with an increased frailty index, adjusted for loneliness and social isolation independently. Compared with a low level of loneliness, there was a higher risk of developing frailty with medium loneliness (hazard ratio [HR] 1·57, 95% CI 1·49 to 1·65; p<0·0001) and high loneliness (HR 2·62, 2·49 to 2·76; p<0·0001). Compared with a low level of social isolation, there was a higher risk of developing frailty with medium social isolation (HR 1·12, 1·05 to 1·20; p<0·0001) and high social isolation (HR 1·32, 1·22 to 1·43; p<0·0001). INTERPRETATION: Both loneliness and social isolation increase the risk of developing frailty. Understanding these mechanisms might offer opportunities to attenuate this risk. FUNDING: None.

Healthy Eating and Active Lifestyle After Bowel Cancer (HEAL ABC): feasibility randomised controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: Targeting modifiable lifestyle factors including diet and physical activity represents a potentially cost-effective strategy that could support a growing population of colorectal cancer survivors and improve their health outcomes. Currently, effective, evidence-based interventions and resources helping people after bowel cancer to adopt new lifestyle habits are lacking. The aim of this trial is to test the Healthy Eating and Active Lifestyle After Bowel Cancer (HEAL-ABC) intervention to inform a future definitive randomised controlled trial. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a feasibility randomised controlled trial. A total of 72 survivors who have completed surgery and all anticancer treatments will be recruited. The intervention group will receive HEAL-ABC resources based on behaviour change theory combined with supportive telephone calls informed by motivational interviewing every 2 weeks during the 3-month intervention, and once a month for 6 months to follow-up. Participants in the control group will follow usual care and have access to resources available in the public domain. The study is testing feasibility of the intervention including adherence and ability to collect data on anthropometry, body composition, diet, physical activity, behaviour change, quality of life, blood markers, contact with healthcare services, morbidities and overall survival. DISCUSSION: The proposed study will add to the evidence base by addressing an area where there is a paucity of data. This study on lifestyle interventions for people after colorectal cancer follows the Medical Research Council guidance on evaluating complex interventions in clinical practice. It focuses on people living after treatment for colorectal cancer and targets an important research area identified by cancer survivors as a research priority reported by the National Cancer Institute and James Lind Alliance UK. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04227353 approved on the 13th of January 2020.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of hospital-based specialist palliative care for adults with advanced illness and their caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Serious illness is often characterised by physical/psychological problems, family support needs, and high healthcare resource use. Hospital-based specialist palliative care (HSPC) has developed to assist in better meeting the needs of patients and their families and potentially reducing hospital care expenditure. There is a need for clarity on the effectiveness and optimal models of HSPC, given that most people still die in hospital and also to allocate scarce resources judiciously. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HSPC compared to usual care for adults with advanced illness (hereafter patients) and their unpaid caregivers/families. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, CDSR, DARE and HTA database via the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; CINAHL; PsycINFO; CareSearch; National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) and two trial registers to August 2019, together with checking of reference lists and relevant systematic reviews, citation searching and contact with experts to identify additional studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the impact of HSPC on outcomes for patients or their unpaid caregivers/families, or both. HSPC was defined as specialist palliative care delivered by a palliative care team that is based in a hospital providing holistic care, co-ordination by a multidisciplinary team, and collaboration between HSPC providers and generalists. HSPC was provided to patients while they were admitted as inpatients to acute care hospitals, outpatients or patients receiving care from hospital outreach teams at home. The comparator was usual care, defined as inpatient or outpatient hospital care without specialist palliative care input at the point of entry into the study, community care or hospice care provided outside of the hospital setting. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias and extracted data. To account for use of different scales across studies, we calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous data. We used an inverse variance random-effects model. For binary data, we calculated odds ratio (ORs) with 95% CIs. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table. Our primary outcomes were patient health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and symptom burden (a collection of two or more symptoms). Key secondary outcomes were pain, depression, satisfaction with care, achieving preferred place of death, mortality/survival, unpaid caregiver burden, and cost-effectiveness. Qualitative data was analysed where available. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 42 RCTs involving 7779 participants (6678 patients and 1101 caregivers/family members). Twenty-one studies were with cancer populations, 14 were with non-cancer populations (of which six were with heart failure patients), and seven with mixed cancer and non-cancer populations (mixed diagnoses). HSPC was offered in different ways and included the following models: ward-based, inpatient consult, outpatient, hospital-at-home or hospital outreach, and service provision across multiple settings which included hospital. For our main analyses, we pooled data from studies reporting adjusted endpoint values. Forty studies had a high risk of bias in at least one domain. Compared with usual care, HSPC improved patient HRQoL with a small effect size of 0.26 SMD over usual care (95% CI 0.15 to 0.37; I2 = 3%, 10 studies, 1344 participants, low-quality evidence, higher scores indicate better patient HRQoL). HSPC also improved other person-centred outcomes. It reduced patient symptom burden with a small effect size of -0.26 SMD over usual care (95% CI -0.41 to -0.12; I2 = 0%, 6 studies, 761 participants, very low-quality evidence, lower scores indicate lower symptom burden). HSPC improved patient satisfaction with care with a small effect size of 0.36 SMD over usual care (95% CI 0.41 to 0.57; I2 = 0%, 2 studies, 337 participants, low-quality evidence, higher scores indicate better patient satisfaction with care). Using home death as a proxy measure for achieving patient's preferred place of death, patients were more likely to die at home with HSPC compared to usual care (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.16; I2 = 0%, 7 studies, 861 participants, low-quality evidence). Data on pain (4 studies, 525 participants) showed no evidence of a difference between HSPC and usual care (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.01; I2 = 0%, very low-quality evidence). Eight studies (N = 1252 participants) reported on adverse events and very low-quality evidence did not demonstrate an effect of HSPC on serious harms. Two studies (170 participants) presented data on caregiver burden and both found no evidence of effect of HSPC (very low-quality evidence). We included 13 economic studies (2103 participants). Overall, the evidence on cost-effectiveness of HSPC compared to usual care was inconsistent among the four full economic studies. Other studies that used only partial economic analysis and those that presented more limited resource use and cost information also had inconsistent results (very low-quality evidence). Quality of the evidence The quality of the evidence assessed using GRADE was very low to low, downgraded due to a high risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Very low- to low-quality evidence suggests that when compared to usual care, HSPC may offer small benefits for several person-centred outcomes including patient HRQoL, symptom burden and patient satisfaction with care, while also increasing the chances of patients dying in their preferred place (measured by home death). While we found no evidence that HSPC causes serious harms, the evidence was insufficient to draw strong conclusions. Although these are only small effect sizes, they may be clinically relevant at an advanced stage of disease with limited prognosis, and are person-centred outcomes important to many patients and families. More well conducted studies are needed to study populations with non-malignant diseases and mixed diagnoses, ward-based models of HSPC, 24 hours access (out-of-hours care) as part of HSPC, pain, achieving patient preferred place of care, patient satisfaction with care, caregiver outcomes (satisfaction with care, burden, depression, anxiety, grief, quality of life), and cost-effectiveness of HSPC. In addition, research is needed to provide validated person-centred outcomes to be used across studies and populations.

Increases in arm volume predict lymphoedema and quality of life deficits after axillary surgery: a prospective cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Lymphoedema develops after axillary clearance (ANC) in 25% of patients. This prospective, multi-centre study compared multi-frequency bioimpedance spectroscopy (BIS) with arm volume measurement to: (1) determine which test has better diagnostic accuracy, (2) identify factors predicting development of lymphoedema, and its effect on quality-of-life. METHODS: Participants (N = 1100) underwent measurements pre and post-ANC surgery for breast cancer. Relative arm volume increase (RAVI) of >10% diagnosed lymphoedema. Predictors of lymphoedema were determined using logistic regression. Optimal diagnostic method was assessed using diagnostic accuracy. Quality-of-life was assessed using the FACT B + 4 questionnaire. RESULTS: Lymphoedema was diagnosed in 22.8% women using RAVI > 10%, 45.6% using BIS criteria, while 24.5% underwent compression sleeve application by 24 months. BMI > 30 was an independent factor for both development (p = 0.005) and progression (p = 0.015) of lymphoedema. RAVI at 1 month, BMI > 30 and number of involved nodes contributed to a novel scoring model to predict lymphoedema by 36 months. Larger decreases in QoL scores post-surgery occurred in lymphoedema patients (p < 0.001). Progression to moderate lymphoedema occurred in 15% patients after sleeve application. CONCLUSIONS: RAVI measurement was the best diagnostic tool for lymphoedema. BIS alone is not appropriate for lymphoedema screening or diagnosis. BMI > 30 predicted lymphoedema diagnosis and progression.

Evaluation of a web-based, tailored intervention to encourage help-seeking for lung cancer symptoms: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: People with lung cancer often wait for several months before presenting symptoms to health services. Some patients report seeking information online to help them appraise symptoms. No research has evaluated whether websites about lung cancer present information in an optimal manner to encourage help-seeking. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of an online, tailored, theory-based intervention in encouraging help-seeking behaviour among people with potential lung cancer symptoms. METHODS: The intervention consisted of a specialised website which provided tailored information about lung cancer and included a component to address beliefs about help-seeking, based on the Theory of Planned Behaviour (TPB-component). Individuals with undiagnosed symptoms were randomised to receive information about lung cancer in a factorial design (tailored/untailored × TPB-component/no TPB-component). Pre and post viewing webpages, participants reported perceived likelihood of seeking help. Data were analysed using robust mixed factorial ANOVA. RESULTS: Data from 253 participants (73.9% female) were analysed. No effect for the TPB-component was found (p = 0.16), nor for tailoring (p = 0.27). Self-reported likelihood of seeking help increased significantly from pre to post (p < 0.001), regardless of tailoring and TPB-components. CONCLUSION: Self-reported likelihood of seeking help for potential lung cancer symptoms may increase after viewing information online. This does not appear to be affected by information tailoring and components to address beliefs. However, intentions remained unchanged in the majority of the sample. This suggests further efforts are needed to improve lung cancer websites if they are to be a useful resource for those seeking advice about their symptoms.

Discharging Women with Advanced Ovarian Cancer on Home Parenteral Nutrition: Making and Implementing the Decision.

Increasingly, patients with advanced ovarian cancer in bowel obstruction are receiving home parenteral nutrition (HPN). Little is known about making and implementing the decision. This study explored the decision-making process for HPN and investigated the barriers and facilitators to implementation. This was a qualitative study underpinned by phenomenology involving 93 longitudinal in-depth interviews with 20 patients, their relatives and healthcare professionals, over 15 months. Participants were interviewed a maximum of four times. Interview transcripts were analysed thematically as per the techniques of Van Manen. We found variance between oncologists and patients regarding ownership of the HPN decision. The oncologists believed they were engaging in a shared decision-making process. However, patients felt that the decision was oncologist-driven. Nevertheless, they were content to have the treatment, when viewing the choice as either HPN or death. In implementing the decision, the principal mutable barrier to a timely discharge was communication difficulties across professional disciplines and organisations. Facilitators included developing a single point-of-contact between organisations, improving communication and implementing standardised processes. Oncologists and patients differ in their perceptions of how treatment decisions are made. Although patients are satisfied with the process, it might be beneficial for healthcare professionals to check patients' understanding of treatment.

Measurement of Muscle Mass and Sarcopenia Using Anthropometry, Bioelectrical Impedance, and Computed Tomography in Surgical Patients with Colorectal Malignancy: Comparison of Agreement Between Methods.

Background: Low skeletal muscle index (SMI) and sarcopenia adversely affect clinical outcomes in oncology patients. Study aims were to assess the agreement of bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA), mid-arm muscle circumference (MAMC), and computed tomography (CT) at the third lumbar vertebra (L3), for the measurement of muscle mass and identification of sarcopenia, in patients with colorectal cancer (CRC).Method: A comparison study of low SMI and sarcopenia determined by BIA and MAMC, compared to CT. Sensitivity, specificity and area under the curve (AUC) were calculated.Results: CT scans were obtained for 100 participants. Low SMI was identified in 29%, 57%, and 20% of participants using CT at L3, BIA, and MAMC, respectively. For low muscle mass BIA showed 60% of participants were correctly classified (AUC 0.619, sensitivity 80%, specificity 52%, kappa 0.241, P = 0.009) and for MAMC, 73% of participants were correctly classified (AUC 0.625, sensitivity 38%, specificity 88%, kappa 0.286, P = 0.005). There were 14%, 31%, and 10% of participants identified as having sarcopenia from CT, BIA, and MAMC, respectively.Conclusions: Both BIA and MAMC show a poor level of agreement for measuring muscle mass compared to CT scans using L3 in patients with CRC.

Palliative home parenteral nutrition in patients with ovarian cancer and malignant bowel obstruction: experiences of women and family caregivers.

BACKGROUND: Malnutrition is a problem in advanced cancer, particularly ovarian cancer where malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) is a frequent complication. Parenteral nutrition is the only way these patients can received adequate nutrition and is a principal indication for palliative home parenteral nutrition (HPN). Giving HPN is contentious as it may increase the burden on patients. This study investigates patients' and family caregivers' experiences of HPN, alongside nutritional status and survival in patients with ovarian cancer and MBO. METHODS: This mixed methods study collected data on participant characteristics, clinical details and body composition using computed tomography (CT) combined with longitudinal in-depth interviews underpinned by phenomenological principles. The cohort comprised 38 women with ovarian cancer and inoperable MBO admitted (10/2016 to 12/ 2017) to a tertiary referral hospital. Longitudinal interviews (n = 57) were carried out with 20 women considered for HPN and 13 of their family caregivers. RESULTS: Of the 38 women, 32 received parenteral nutrition (PN) in hospital and 17 were discharged on HPN. Nutritional status was poor with 31 of 33 women who had a CT scan having low muscle mass, although 10 were obese. Median overall survival from admission with MBO for all 38 women was 70 days (range 8-506) and for those 17 on HPN was 156 days (range 46-506). Women experienced HPN as one facet of their illness, but viewed it as a "lifeline" that allowed them to live outside hospital. Nevertheless, HPN treatment came with losses including erosion of normality through an impact on activities of daily living and dealing with the bureaucracy surrounding the process. Family caregivers coped but were often left in an emotionally vulnerable state. CONCLUSIONS: Women and family caregivers reported that the inconvenience and disruption caused by HPN was worth the extended time they had at home.