Improving the Evidence Base in Palliative Care to Inform Practice and Policy: Thinking Outside the Box

The adoption of evidence-based hierarchies and research methods from other disciplines may not completely translate to complex palliative care settings. The heterogeneity of the palliative care population, complexity of clinical presentations, and fluctuating health states present significant research challenges. The aim of this narrative review was to explore the debate about the use of current evidence-based approaches for conducting research, such as randomized controlled trials and other study designs, in palliative care, and more specifically to 1) describe key myths about palliative care research; 2) highlight substantive challenges of conducting palliative care research, using case illustrations; and 3) propose specific strategies to address some of these challenges. Myths about research in palliative care revolve around evidence hierarchies, sample heterogeneity, random assignment, participant burden, and measurement issues. Challenges arise because of the complex physical, psychological, existential, and spiritual problems faced by patients, families, and service providers. These challenges can be organized according to six general domains: patient, system/organization, context/setting, study design, research team, and ethics. A number of approaches for dealing with challenges in conducting research fall into five separate domains: study design, sampling, conceptual, statistical, and measures and outcomes. Although randomized controlled trials have their place whenever possible, alternative designs may offer more feasible research protocols that can be successfully implemented in palliative care. Therefore, this article highlights “outside the box” approaches that would benefit both clinicians and researchers in the palliative care field. Ultimately, the selection of research designs is dependent on a clearly articulated research question, which drives the research process

Family Caregiver Participation in Palliative Care Research: Challenging the Myth

Context: Despite international guidelines emphasizing consumer-directed care and autonomous decisions in research participation, there is a common myth that research can be an additional and unwanted burden on patients and their family members. Objectives: To examine the experiences and impact of research involvement on family caregivers (FCs) of terminally ill people, focusing within home-based palliative care. Methods: Three hundred sixteen of 322 participants (98.1%), who completed an FC support intervention through a stepped-wedge cluster trial (Australia, 2012-2015), participated in a postintervention telephone interview on their study experiences, which included quantitative and qualitative questions. Results: Ninety-seven percent of both the control (n = 89) and intervention (n = 227) groups perceived positive aspects, whereas almost all did not report any negative aspects of being involved in this research; the majority rated their involvement as very/extremely beneficial (control 77%; intervention 83%). The qualitative analysis generated three major themes: "intrapersonal-inward directed"; "connection with others-outward directed"; and "interpersonal-participant-researcher relationship.". Conclusions: This study provided quantitative and qualitative evidence challenging the myth. In contrast to health professional concerns, FCs appreciated the opportunity to participate and benefited from their involvement in research. Research protocols need to be specifically tailored to the needs of family caregivers and include debriefing opportunities for all participants at the end of intervention studies, regardless of which group they have been assigned. Strategies that facilitate health professionals' understanding of the research and risk benefits may help reduce gatekeeping and improve the validity of research findings

Prevalence of distressing symptoms in hospitalised patients on medical wards: A cross-sectional study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Many patients with advanced, serious, non-malignant disease belong to the population generally seen on medical wards. However, little research has been carried out on palliative care needs in this group. The aims of this study were to estimate the prevalence of distressing symptoms in patients hospitalised in a Department of Internal Medicine, estimate how many of these patients might be regarded as palliative, and describe their main symptoms.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Cross-sectional (point prevalence) study. All patients hospitalised in the Departments of Internal Medicine, Pulmonary Medicine, and Cardiology were asked to do a symptom assessment by use of the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS). Patients were defined as "palliative" if they had an advanced, serious, chronic disease with limited life expectancy and symptom relief as the main goal of treatment.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>222 patients were registered in all. ESAS was completed for 160 patients. 79 (35.6%) were defined as palliative and 43 of them completed ESAS. The patients in the palliative group were older than the rest, and reported more dyspnea (70%) and a greater lack of wellbeing (70%). Other symptoms reported by this group were dry mouth (58%), fatigue (56%), depression (41%), anxiety (37%), pain at rest (30%), and pain on movement (42%).</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>More than one third of the patients in a Department of Internal Medicine were defined as palliative, and the majority of the patients in this palliative group reported severe symptoms. There is a need for skills in symptom control on medical wards.</p

The changing causal foundations of cancer-related symptom clustering during the final month of palliative care: A longitudinal study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Symptoms tend to occur in what have been called symptom clusters. Early symptom cluster research was imprecise regarding the causal foundations of the coordinations between specific symptoms, and was silent on whether the relationships between symptoms remained stable over time. This study develops a causal model of the relationships between symptoms in cancer palliative care patients as they approach death, and investigates the changing associations among the symptoms and between those symptoms and well-being.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Complete symptom assessment scores were obtained for 82 individuals from an existing palliative care database. The data included assessments of pain, anxiety, nausea, shortness of breath, drowsiness, loss of appetite, tiredness, depression and well-being, all collected using the Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS). Relationships between the symptoms and well-being were investigated using a structural equation model.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The model fit acceptably and explained between 26% and 83% of the variation in appetite, tiredness, depression, and well-being. Drowsiness displayed consistent effects on appetite, tiredness and well-being. In contrast, anxiety's effect on well-being shifted importantly, with a direct effect and an indirect effect through tiredness at one month, being replaced by an effect working exclusively through depression at one week.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Some of the causal forces explaining the variations in, and relationships among, palliative care patients' symptoms changed over the final month of life. This illustrates how investigating the causal foundations of symptom correlation or clustering can provide more detailed understandings that may contribute to improved control of patient comfort, quality of life, and quality of death.</p

An action research approach to facilitating the adoption of a foot health assessment tool in India

Background: India has a diabetes population that is growing and alongside this, the incidence of limb threatening foot problems is increasing. Foot health care provision does not yet meet this demand. In one locality in India, clinicians had an unstructured approach to foot health assessments resulting in poor adoption of evidence based guidelines from the West and a persistence of serious foot complications. There was the perception that existing assessment tools did not take into account the local cultural, organizational and professional needs and there was a lack of ownership of any potential solution to the problem. Therefore, the aim of this work was to facilitate the ownership and development of a foot health assessment tool for use in the Indian context. In order to achieve this an action research approach was chosen. Methods: Participants were facilitated through the action and implementation phases of the action research cycle by the researchers. The action phase included generating a list of potential items for inclusion in the tool from a review of the literature to provide an evidence based foundation for the foot health assessment tool. A modified Delphi method was used to further refine the contents of the tool. Members of the Delphi Panel (n=8) were experts in their field of medicine and experts in delivering health care within services in India. Results: The outcome of the study was the adoption of a locally developed foot health assessment tool (Salford Indian Foot Health Assessment Tool, SIFT). It contains thirteen sections, which reflect the risk factors identified for assessing foot health agreed by the participants to fit the Indian context. The SIFT is supported with evidence based guidelines from the West and a training program was delivered by the researchers in order to support its implementation into clinical practice. Conclusion: An action research approach has facilitated the development and implementation of a locally created and owned foot health assessment tool. This in turn has resulted in the integration of evidence-based guidelines from the West with consideration to local cultural, organizational and professional needs and ultimately the needs of their patients. Further work is underway evaluating the outcomes of the SIFT in practice. Keywords: Diabetes; Action research; Foot health assessment