The effectiveness of the Liverpool care pathway in improving end of life care for dying cancer patients in hospital. A cluster randomised trial

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Most cancer patients still die in hospital, mainly in medical wards. Many studies in different countries have shown the poor quality of end-of-life care delivery in hospitals. The Program "Liverpool Care Pathway for the dying patient" (LCP), developed in the UK to transfer the hospice model of care into hospitals and other care settings, is a complex intervention to improve the quality of end-of-life care. The results from qualitative and quantitative studies suggest that the LCP Program can improve significantly the quality of end-of-life care delivery in hospitals, but no randomised trial has been conducted till now.</p> <p>Methods and design</p> <p>This is a randomized cluster trial, stratified by regions and matched for assessment period. Pairs of eligible medical wards from different hospitals will be randomized to receive the LCP-I Program or no intervention until the end of the trial. The LCP-I Program will be implemented by a Palliative Care Unit.</p> <p>The assessment of the end-points will be performed for all cancer deaths occurred in the six months after the end of the LCP-I implementation in the experimental wards and, in the same period of time, in the matched control wards. The primary end-point is the overall quality of end-of-life care provided on the ward to dying cancer patients and their families, assessed using the Global Scale of the Italian version of the Toolkit <it>"After-death Bereaved Family Member Interview</it>".</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>This study can be interpreted as a Phase III trial according to the Medical Research Council Framework. In this study, the effectiveness of a fully defined intervention is assessed by comparing the distribution of the endpoints in the experimental and in the control arm.</p> <p>Research ID</p> <p>RFPS-2006-6-341619</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: <a href="http://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT01081899">NCT01081899</a></p

Balancing the playing field: collaborative gaming for physical training.

BACKGROUND: Multiplayer video games promoting exercise-based rehabilitation may facilitate motor learning, by increasing motivation through social interaction. However, a major design challenge is to enable meaningful inter-subject interaction, whilst allowing for significant skill differences between players. We present a novel motor-training paradigm that allows real-time collaboration and performance enhancement, across a wide range of inter-subject skill mismatches, including disabled vs. able-bodied partnerships. METHODS: A virtual task consisting of a dynamic ball on a beam, is controlled at each end using independent digital force-sensing handgrips. Interaction is mediated through simulated physical coupling and locally-redundant control. Game performance was measured in 16 healthy-healthy and 16 patient-expert dyads, where patients were hemiparetic stroke survivors using their impaired arm. Dual-player was compared to single-player performance, in terms of score, target tracking, stability, effort and smoothness; and questionnaires probing user-experience and engagement. RESULTS: Performance of less-able subjects (as ranked from single-player ability) was enhanced by dual-player mode, by an amount proportionate to the partnership's mismatch. The more abled partners' performances decreased by a similar amount. Such zero-sum interactions were observed for both healthy-healthy and patient-expert interactions. Dual-player was preferred by the majority of players independent of baseline ability and subject group; healthy subjects also felt more challenged, and patients more skilled. CONCLUSION: This is the first demonstration of implicit skill balancing in a truly collaborative virtual training task leading to heightened engagement, across both healthy subjects and stroke patients

The effects of integrated care: a systematic review of UK and international evidence

BACKGROUND: Healthcare systems around the world have been responding to the demand for better integrated models of service delivery. However, there is a need for further clarity regarding the effects of these new models of integration, and exploration regarding whether models introduced in other care systems may achieve similar outcomes in a UK national health service context. METHODS: The study aimed to carry out a systematic review of the effects of integration or co-ordination between healthcare services, or between health and social care on service delivery outcomes including effectiveness, efficiency and quality of care. Electronic databases including MEDLINE; Embase; PsycINFO; CINAHL; Science and Social Science Citation Indices; and the Cochrane Library were searched for relevant literature published between 2006 to March 2017. Online sources were searched for UK grey literature, and citation searching, and manual reference list screening were also carried out. Quantitative primary studies and systematic reviews, reporting actual or perceived effects on service delivery following the introduction of models of integration or co-ordination, in healthcare or health and social care settings in developed countries were eligible for inclusion. Strength of evidence for each outcome reported was analysed and synthesised using a four point comparative rating system of stronger, weaker, inconsistent or limited evidence. RESULTS: One hundred sixty seven studies were eligible for inclusion. Analysis indicated evidence of perceived improved quality of care, evidence of increased patient satisfaction, and evidence of improved access to care. Evidence was rated as either inconsistent or limited regarding all other outcomes reported, including system-wide impacts on primary care, secondary care, and health care costs. There were limited differences between outcomes reported by UK and international studies, and overall the literature had a limited consideration of effects on service users. CONCLUSIONS: Models of integrated care may enhance patient satisfaction, increase perceived quality of care, and enable access to services, although the evidence for other outcomes including service costs remains unclear. Indications of improved access may have important implications for services struggling to cope with increasing demand. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Prospero registration number: 42016037725

Quantifying motor recovery after stroke using independent vector analysis and graph-theoretical analysis

The assessment of neuroplasticity after stroke through functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI) analysis is a developing field where the objective is to better understand the neural process of recovery and to better target rehabilitation interventions. The challenge in this population stems from the large amount of individual spatial variability and the need to summarize entire brain maps by generating simple, yet discriminating features to highlight differences in functional connectivity. Independent vector analysis (IVA) has been shown to provide superior performance in preserving subject variability when compared with widely used methods such as group independent component analysis. Hence, in this paper, graph-theoretical (GT) analysis is applied to IVA-generated components to effectively exploit the individual subjects' connectivity to produce discriminative features. The analysis is performed on fMRI data collected from individuals with chronic stroke both before and after a 6-week arm and hand rehabilitation intervention. Resulting GT features are shown to capture connectivity changes that are not evident through direct comparison of the group t-maps. The GT features revealed increased small worldness across components and greater centrality in key motor networks as a result of the intervention, suggesting improved efficiency in neural communication. Clinically, these results bring forth new possibilities as a means to observe the neural processes underlying improvements in motor function