Evaluating a complex system-wide intervention using the difference in differences method: the Delivering Choice Programme.

OBJECTIVES: We report the use of difference in differences (DiD) methodology to evaluate a complex, system-wide healthcare intervention. We use the worked example of evaluating the Marie Curie Delivering Choice Programme (DCP) for advanced illness in a large urban healthcare economy. METHODS: DiD was selected because a randomised controlled trial was not feasible. The method allows for before and after comparison of changes that occur in an intervention site with a matched control site. This enables analysts to control for the effect of the intervention in the absence of a local control. Any policy, seasonal or other confounding effects over the test period are assumed to have occurred in a balanced way at both sites. Data were obtained from primary care trusts. Outcomes were place of death, inpatient admissions, length of stay and costs. RESULTS: Small changes were identified between pre- and post-DCP outputs in the intervention site. The proportion of home deaths and median cost increased slightly, while the number of admissions per patient and the average length of stay per admission decreased slightly. None of these changes was statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS: Effects estimates were limited by small numbers accessing new services and selection bias in sample population and comparator site. In evaluating the effect of a complex healthcare intervention, the choice of analysis method and output measures is crucial. Alternatives to randomised controlled trials may be required for evaluating large scale complex interventions and the DiD approach is suitable, subject to careful selection of measured outputs and control population.

The role of acceptance in rehabilitation in life-threatening illness.

CONTEXT: Palliative care rehabilitation aims to maximize physical and psychological functioning, but negative thoughts can hinder patients from attempting this approach. Acceptance and commitment therapy (ACT), a modified form of cognitive behavioral therapy, encourages individuals to experience and manage negative emotions by focusing on changing individual behavior and so improve functioning. ACT has been used in many health-related behavioral interventions but not in palliative care rehabilitation. OBJECTIVES: To investigate the relationship between acceptance (often called experiential acceptance in ACT) and psychological and physical status. METHODS: Cross-sectional study in which a consecutive sample of patients attending a specialist palliative care day therapy unit for rehabilitation completed the Acceptance and Action Questionnaire-II to measure acceptance and the Kessler-10 questionnaire to measure psychological morbidity. Physical function was assessed by a timed two-minute walking test and one-minute sit-to-stand test. Correlation statistics and multivariable regression analyses were used to explore the strength of relationships between acceptance and psychological morbidity and physical function. RESULTS: One hundred one patients were recruited, mainly white women with a mean age of 64 years. Correlation analysis showed a negative association between acceptance and psychological morbidity (r=-0.59) and a positive association between acceptance and sit to stand (r=0.27) and distance walked (r=0.21). All three of these relationships were statistically significant after adjustment. CONCLUSION: These associations suggest that it may be possible to reduce psychological morbidity and improve physical mobility by increasing patients' acceptance using an ACT-based intervention. Future work is now needed to develop an ACT-based intervention in palliative care rehabilitation and test its acceptability and feasibility.

Interventions for supporting informal caregivers of patients in the terminal phase of a disease.

BACKGROUND: Patients in the terminal phase of a disease may have complex needs. It is often family and friends who play a central role in providing support, despite health professional input and regardless of whether the patient is at home or elsewhere. Such informal caring may involve considerable physical, psychological, and economic stresses. A range of supportive programmes for caregivers is being developed including psychological support and practical assistance. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of supportive interventions that aim to improve the psychological and physical health of informal caregivers of patients in the terminal phase of their illness. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL, The Cochrane Library, Issue 2 2010); MEDLINE (1950 to May 2010); EMBASE (1980 to May 2010); PsycINFO (1872 to May 2010); CINAHL (1937 to May 2010); National Health Service Research Register (2000 to November 2008) and Dissertation Abstracts (1716 to May 2010). We searched the reference lists of relevant studies; contacted experts; and handsearched journals. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) of interventions to support adults who were caring for a friend or relative with a disease in the terminal phase. Interventions could include practical and emotional support and/or the facilitation of coping skills. Interventions could support caregivers indirectly via patient care. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened citations against the selection criteria. Data were extracted by one author and checked by another. This included extraction of any adverse effects. Risk of bias assessment was undertaken by two authors. We contacted trial authors to obtain missing information. Trial data were combined, where appropriate, on the review's primary outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We included eleven RCTs involving 1836 caregiver participants. Nine interventions were delivered directly to the caregiver. Seven of these provided support in the caring role, another involved a family life review, and one grief therapy. None provided practical support. The other two interventions aimed to support caregivers indirectly via patient care. Overall the risk of bias is unclear, as all trials under-reported methods.There is low quality evidence that interventions directly supporting the caregiver significantly reduce psychological distress in the short term (8 trials: standardised mean difference (SMD) -0.15; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.28 to -0.02). There is also low quality evidence that these interventions in the short term may marginally improve coping skills and quality of life, but neither results were statistically significant (7 trials: SMD -0.05; 95% CI -0.24 to 0.14; 6 trials: SMD 0.08; 95% CI -0.11 to 0.26, respectively). One study assessed physical outcomes, specifically sleep improvement, and found no difference (median effect 0.00). No study measured health service use or adverse outcomes. In one study, however, a subgroup of intervention participants had higher levels of family conflict.Evidence was less clear on the indirect interventions. While both trials in this category found that supporting the patient may reduce psychological distress, none of the four assessments were statistically significant. There were no evaluations of coping with the caring role, quality of life, service use or adverse outcomes. In one trial there was no difference between trial arms in the proportion of caregivers reporting good physical health. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: There is evidence that supportive interventions may help reduce caregivers' psychological distress. These findings suggest that practitioners should enquire about the concerns of caregivers and should consider that they may benefit from additional support. There is, however, a need for further research to explore the benefits identified, and to assess the interventions' effects on physical health, and potential harms. Trials need to report their methods fully.

Advance care planning in advanced cancer: can it be achieved? An exploratory randomized patient preference trial of a care planning discussion.

OBJECTIVE: Little is known about the effectiveness of advance care planning in the United Kingdom, although policy documents recommend that it should be available to all those with life-limiting illness. METHOD: An exploratory patient preference randomized controlled trial of advance care planning discussions with an independent mediator (maximum three sessions) was conducted in London outpatient oncology clinics and a nearby hospice. Seventy-seven patients (mean age 62 years, 39 male) with various forms of recurrent progressive cancer participated, and 68 (88%) completed follow-up at 8 weeks. Patients completed visual analogue scales assessing perceived ability to discuss end-of-life planning with healthcare professionals or family and friends (primary outcome), happiness with the level of communication, and satisfaction with care, as well as a standardized measure of anxiety and depression. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients (51%) showed preference for the intervention. Discussions with professionals or family and friends about the future increased in the intervention arms, whether randomized or preference, but happiness with communication was unchanged or worse, and satisfaction with services decreased. Trial participation did not cause significant anxiety or depression and attrition was low. SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS: A randomized trial of advance care planning is possible. This study provides new evidence on its acceptability and effectiveness for patients with advanced cancer.

Laxatives or methylnaltrexone for the management of constipation in palliative care patients.

BACKGROUND: Constipation is common in palliative care; it can generate considerable suffering due to the unpleasant physical symptoms. In the first Cochrane Review on effectiveness of laxatives for the management of constipation in palliative care patients, published in 2006, no conclusions could be drawn because of the limited number of evaluations. This article describes the first update of this review. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effectiveness of laxatives or methylnaltrexone for the management of constipation in palliative care patients. SEARCH STRATEGY: We searched databases including MEDLINE and CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library) in 2005 and in the update to August 2010. SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating laxatives for constipation in palliative care patients. In the update we also included RCTs on subcutaneous methylnaltrexone; an opioid-receptor antagonist that is now licensed for the treatment of opioid-induced constipation in palliative care when response to usual laxative therapy is insufficient. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors assessed trial quality and extracted data. The appropriateness of combining data from the studies depended upon clinical and outcome measure homogeneity. MAIN RESULTS: We included seven studies involving 616 participants; all under-reported methodological features. In four studies the laxatives lactulose, senna, co-danthramer, misrakasneham, and magnesium hydroxide with liquid paraffin were evaluated. In three methylnaltrexone.In studies comparing the different laxatives evidence was inconclusive. Evidence on subcutaneous methylnaltrexone was clearer; in combined analysis (287 participants) methylnaltrexone, in comparison with a placebo, significantly induced laxation at 4 hours (odds ratio 6.95; 95% confidence interval 3.83 to 12.61). In combined analyses there was no difference in the proportion experiencing side effects, although participants on methylnaltrexone suffered more flatulence and dizziness. No evidence of opioid withdrawal was found. In one study severe adverse events, commonly abdominal pain, were reported that were possibly related to methylnaltrexone. A serious adverse event considered to be related to the methylnaltrexone also occurred; this involved a participant having severe diarrhoea, subsequent dehydration and cardiovascular collapse. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The 2010 update found evidence on laxatives for management of constipation remains limited due to insufficient RCTs. However, the conclusions of this update have changed since the original review publication in that it now includes evidence on methylnaltrexone. Here it found that subcutaneous methylnaltrexone is effective in inducing laxation in palliative care patients with opioid-induced constipation and where conventional laxatives have failed. However, the safety of this product is not fully evaluated. Large, rigorous, independent trials are needed.