Randomised controlled trial of a new palliative care service: Compliance, recruitment and completeness of follow-up

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Palliative care has been proposed for progressive non-cancer conditions but there have been few evaluations of service developments. We analysed recruitment, compliance and follow-up data of a fast track (or wait list control) randomised controlled trial of a new palliative care service – a design not previously used to assess palliative care.</p> <p>Methods/Design</p> <p>An innovative palliative care service (comprising a consultant in palliative medicine, a clinical nurse specialist, an administrator and a psychosocial worker) was delivered to people severely affected by multiple sclerosis (MS), and their carers, in southeast London. Our design followed the MRC Framework for the Evaluation of Complex Interventions. In phase II we conducted randomised controlled trial, of immediate referral to the service (fast-track) versus a 12-week wait (standard best practice). Main outcome measures were: compliance (the extent the trial protocol was adhered to), recruitment (target 50 patients), attrition and missing data rates; trial outcomes were Palliative Care Outcome Scale and MS Impact Scale.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>69 patients were referred, 52 entered the trial (26 randomised to each arm), 5 refused consent and 12 were excluded from the trial for other reasons, usually illness or urgent needs, achieving our target numbers. 25/26 fast track and 21/26 standard best practice patients completed the trial, resulting in 217/225 (96%) of possible interviews completed, 87% of which took place in the patient's home. Main reasons for failure to interview and/or attrition were death or illness. There were three deaths in the standard best practice group and one in the fast-track group during the trial. At baseline there were no differences between groups. Missing data for individual questionnaire items were small (median 0, mean 1–5 items out of 56+ items per interview), not associated with any patient or carer characteristics or with individual questionnaires, but were associated with interviewer.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>This is the first time a fast track (or wait list) randomised trial has been reported in palliative care. We found it achieved good recruitment and is a feasible method to evaluate palliative care services when patients are expected to live longer than 3–6 months. Home interviews are needed for a trial of this kind; interviewers need careful recruitment, training and supervision; and there should be careful separation from the clinical service of the control patients to prevent accidental contamination.</p> <p>Trial Registration</p> <p>Clinical Trials.Gov NCT00364963</p

Assessing the feasibility, acceptability and potential effectiveness of Dignity Therapy for people with advanced cancer referred to a hospital-based palliative care team: Study protocol

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Loss of dignity for people with advanced cancer is associated with high levels of psychological and spiritual distress and the loss of the will to live. Dignity Therapy is a brief psychotherapy, which has been developed to help promote dignity and reduce distress. It comprises a recorded interview, which is transcribed, edited then returned to the patient, who can bequeath it to people of their choosing. Piloting in Canada, Australia and the USA, has suggested that Dignity Therapy is beneficial to people with advanced cancer and their families. The aims of this study are to assess the feasibility, acceptability and potential effectiveness of Dignity Therapy to reduce psychological and spiritual distress in people with advanced cancer who have been referred to hospital-based palliative care teams in the UK, and to pilot the methods for a Phase III RCT.</p> <p>Design</p> <p>A randomised controlled open-label trial. Forty patients with advanced cancer are randomly allocated to one of two groups: (i) Intervention (Dignity Therapy offered in addition to any standard care), and (ii) Control group (standard care). Recipients of the 'generativity' documents are asked their views on taking part in the study and the therapy. Both quantitative and qualitative outcomes are assessed in face-to-face interviews at baseline and at approximately one and four weeks after the intervention (equivalent in the control group). The primary outcome is patients' sense of dignity (potential effectiveness) assessed by the Patient Dignity Inventory. Secondary outcomes for patients include distress, hopefulness and quality of life. In view of the relatively small sample size, quantitative analyses are mainly descriptive. The qualitative analysis uses the Framework method.</p> <p>Discussion</p> <p>Dignity Therapy is brief, can be delivered at the bedside and may help both patients and their families. This detailed exploratory research shows if it is feasible to offer Dignity Therapy to patients with advanced cancer, many of whom are likely to be in the terminal stage of their illness, whether it is acceptable to them and their families, if it is likely to be effective, and determine whether a Phase III RCT is desirable.</p> <p>Trial registration</p> <p>Current Controlled Clinical Trials: ISRCTN29868352</p

Measurement of the Positive Muon Anomalous Magnetic Moment to 0.20 ppm

We present a new measurement of the positive muon magnetic anomaly, a_{μ}≡(g_{μ}-2)/2, from the Fermilab Muon g-2 Experiment using data collected in 2019 and 2020. We have analyzed more than 4 times the number of positrons from muon decay than in our previous result from 2018 data. The systematic error is reduced by more than a factor of 2 due to better running conditions, a more stable beam, and improved knowledge of the magnetic field weighted by the muon distribution, ω[over ˜]_{p}^{'}, and of the anomalous precession frequency corrected for beam dynamics effects, ω_{a}. From the ratio ω_{a}/ω[over ˜]_{p}^{'}, together with precisely determined external parameters, we determine a_{μ}=116 592 057(25)×10^{-11} (0.21 ppm). Combining this result with our previous result from the 2018 data, we obtain a_{μ}(FNAL)=116 592 055(24)×10^{-11} (0.20 ppm). The new experimental world average is a_{μ}(exp)=116 592 059(22)×10^{-11} (0.19 ppm), which represents a factor of 2 improvement in precision

The impact of disease-related symptoms and palliative care concerns on health-related quality of life in multiple myeloma:a multi-centre study

BACKGROUND: Multiple myeloma, the second most common haematological cancer, remains incurable. Its incidence is rising due to population ageing. Despite the impact of the disease and its treatment, not much is known on who is most in need of supportive and palliative care. This study aimed to (a) assess symptom severity, palliative care concerns and health-related quality of life (HRQOL) in patients with multiple myeloma, and (b) to determine which factors are associated with a lower quality of life. We further wanted to know (c) whether general symptom level has a stronger influence on HRQOL than disease characteristics. METHODS: This multi-centre cross-sectional study sampled two cohorts of patients with multiple myeloma from 18 haematological cancer centres in the UK. The Myeloma Patient Outcome Scale (MyPOS) was used to measure symptoms and concerns. Measures of quality of life included the EORTC QLQ-C30, its myeloma module and the EuroQoL EQ-5D. Data were collected on socio-demographic, disease and treatment characteristics and phase of illness. Point prevalence of symptoms and concerns was determined. Multiple regression models quantified relationships between independent factors and the MyPOS, EORTC global quality of life item and EQ5D Index. RESULTS: Five-hundred-fifty-seven patients, on average 3.5 years (SD: 3.4) post-diagnosis, were recruited. 18.2 % had newly diagnosed disease, 47.9 % were in a treatment-free interval and 32.7 % had relapsed/progressive disease phase. Patients reported a mean of 7.2 symptoms (SD: 3.3) out of 15 potential symptoms. The most common symptoms were pain (72 %), fatigue (88 %) and breathlessness (61 %). Those with relapsed/progressive disease reported the highest mean number of symptoms and the highest overall palliative care concerns (F = 9.56, p < 0.001). Factors associated with high palliative care concerns were a general high symptom level, presence of pain, anxiety, low physical function, younger age, and being in the advanced stages of disease. CONCLUSION: Patients with multiple myeloma have a high symptom burden and low HRQOL, in the advanced and the earlier stages of disease. Identification of patients in need of supportive care should focus on assessing patient-reported outcomes such as symptoms and functioning regularly in clinical practice, complementary to traditional biomedical markers. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s12885-016-2410-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users