Information provision for people with multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

People with multiple sclerosis (MS) are confronted with a number of important uncertainties concerning many aspects of the disease. These include diagnosis, prognosis, disease course, disease-modifying therapies, symptomatic therapies, and non-pharmacological interventions, among others. While people with MS demand adequate information to be able to actively participate in medical decision making and to self manage their disease, it has been shown that patients' disease-related knowledge is poor, therefore guidelines recommend clear and concise high-quality information at all stages of the disease. Several studies have outlined communication and information deficits in the care of people with MS. However, only a few information and decision support programmes have been published.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objectives of this updated review was to evaluate the effectiveness of information provision interventions for people with MS that aim to promote informed choice and improve patient-relevant outcomes, Further objectives were to evaluate the components and the developmental processes of the complex interventions used, to highlight the quantity and the certainty of the research evidence available, and to set an agenda for future research.

SEARCH METHODS

For this update, we searched the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the Central Nervous System Group Specialised Register, which contains trials from CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library 2017, Issue 11), MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, LILACS, PEDro, and clinical trials registries (29 November 2017) as well as other sources. We also searched reference lists of identified articles and contacted trialists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster-randomised controlled trials, and quasi-randomised trials comparing information provision for people with MS or suspected MS (intervention groups) with usual care or other types of information provision (control groups) were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the retrieved articles for relevance and methodological quality and extracted data. Critical appraisal of studies addressed the risk of selection bias, performance bias, attrition bias, and detection bias. We contacted authors of relevant studies for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified one new RCT (73 participants), which when added to the 10 previously included RCTs resulted in a total of 11 RCTs that met the inclusion criteria and were analysed (1387 participants overall; mean age, range: 31 to 51; percentage women, range: 63% to 100%; percentage relapsing-remitting MS course, range: 45% to 100%). The interventions addressed a variety of topics using different approaches for information provision in different settings. Topics included disease-modifying therapy, relapse management, self care strategies, fatigue management, family planning, and general health promotion. The active intervention components included decision aids, decision coaching, educational programmes, self care programmes, and personal interviews with physicians. All studies used one or more components, but the number and extent differed markedly between studies. The studies had a variable risk of bias. We did not perform meta-analyses due to marked clinical heterogeneity. All five studies assessing MS-related knowledge (505 participants; moderate-certainty evidence) detected significant differences between groups as a result of the interventions, indicating that information provision may successfully increase participants' knowledge. There were mixed results on decision making (five studies, 793 participants; low-certainty evidence) and quality of life (six studies, 671 participants; low-certainty evidence). No adverse events were detected in the seven studies reporting this outcome.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Information provision for people with MS seems to increase disease-related knowledge, with less clear results on decision making and quality of life. The included studies in this review reported no negative side effects of providing disease-related information to people with MS. Interpretation of study results remains challenging due to the marked heterogeneity of interventions and outcome measures.

Information provision for people with multiple sclerosis

BACKGROUND

People with multiple sclerosis (MS) are confronted with a number of important uncertainties concerning many aspects of the disease. Among others, these include diagnosis, prognosis, disease course, disease-modifying therapies, symptomatic therapies and non-pharmacological interventions. It has been shown that people with MS demand adequate information to be able to actively participate in medical decision making and to self-manage their disease. On the other hand, it has been found that patients' disease-related knowledge is poor. Therefore, guidelines have recommended clear and concise high-quality information at all stages of the disease. Several studies have outlined communication and information deficits in the care of people with MS and, accordingly, a number of information and decision support programmes have been published.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the effectiveness of information provision interventions for people with MS that aim to promote informed choice and improve patient-relevant outcomes.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Multiple Sclerosis and Rare Diseases of the Central Nervous System Group Specialised Register which contains trials from CENTRAL (The Cochrane Library 2013, Issue 6), MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, PEDro and clinical trials registries (12 June 2013) as well as other sources. In addition, we searched PsycINFO, trial registries, and reference lists of identified articles. We also contacted trialists.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomised controlled trials, cluster randomised controlled trials and quasi-randomised trials comparing information provision for people with MS or suspected MS (intervention groups) with usual care or other types of information provision (control groups) were eligible.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed the retrieved articles for relevance and methodological quality, and extracted data. Critical appraisal of studies addressed the risk of selection bias, performance bias, attrition bias and detection bias. We contacted authors of relevant studies for additional information.

MAIN RESULTS

Ten randomised controlled trials involving a total of 1314 participants met the inclusion criteria and were analysed. The interventions addressed a variety of topics using different approaches for information provision in different settings. Topics included disease-modifying therapy, relapse management, self-care strategies, fatigue management, family planning and general health promotion. The interventions contained decision aids, educational programmes, self-care interventions and personal interviews with physicians. All interventions were complex interventions using more than one active component, but the number and extent of the intervention components differed markedly between studies. The studies had a variable risk of bias. We did not perform meta-analyses due to marked clinical heterogeneity. All four studies assessing MS-related knowledge (524 participants; moderate-quality evidence) detected significant differences between groups as a result of the interventions indicating that information provision may successfully increase participants' knowledge. There were mixed results from four studies reporting effects on decision making (836 participants; low-quality evidence) and from five studies assessing quality of life (605 participants; low-quality evidence). There were no adverse events in the six studies reporting on adverse events.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Information provision for people with MS seems to increase disease-related knowledge, with less clear results on decision making and quality of life. There seem to be no negative side effects from informing patients about their disease. Interpretation of study results remains challenging due to the marked heterogeneity of the interventions and outcome measures.

The role of information in supporting self-care in vascular conditions: a conceptual and empirical review

Self-care has the potential to make a significant contribution to vascular conditions, but engagement with self-care support has been limited. Lack of relevant information is highlighted by patients and policy-makers as an important barrier to effective self-care, and information provides a potentially efficient platform for changing behaviour. However, work within the social sciences has generally seen information as a necessary but insufficient driver of health behaviours. Furthermore, some groups (such as the socially disadvantaged) are expected to be less amenable to information interventions. We conducted an integrated conceptual and empirical review on information-based interventions for people with vascular disease (diabetes, heart disease and kidney disease). We reviewed conceptual and empirical work concerning the role and impact of information in self-care support to generate an explanatory framework to determine why information was effective or ineffective in encouraging self-care in patients with vascular conditions. This involved mapping relevant theories and models linking information and self-care. We also explored published systematic reviews of educational interventions in diabetes, coronary heart disease and chronic kidney disease to examine the role of information and evidence concerning its effectiveness and impact in different patient populations. The conceptual review identified variation among information interventions in terms of type, function, and their relationship to behaviour change techniques and psychological mediators of behaviour change. Key moderators of the effect of information included types of disorder, and patient capacity and resources. A wealth of educational interventions exists for diabetes and heart conditions, but the precise components of these interventions that are effective are difficult to identify. There is little evidence concerning optimal ways of tailoring interventions for socially disadvantaged groups other than ethnic minorities. A focus on printed information may not provide access to effective methods of information delivery (e.g. tailored information, use of narratives and user generated content). Developing a framework for the effective use of information needs to take account the full range of the factors identified.

Chinese herbal medicines for induction of remission in advanced or late gastric cancer

BACKGROUND

Gastric cancer is difficult to cure once it progresses into an advanced or late stage. Although some chemotherapies or bio-therapies have made progress in the remission of this disease, mortality remains high. A variety of Chinese medicinal herbs have been used to treat gastric cancer.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of Chinese medicinal herbs in the short term remission of advanced or late gastric cancer.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, AHMED (Allied and Complementary Medicine Database) and CBM (Chinese Biomedical Database) from the first year of the databases to May, 2008. We handsearched a number of journals.

SELECTION CRITERIA

All randomised clinical trials of Chinese herbs for advanced or late gastric cancer were included.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently extracted the data, which were analysed by RevMan 5.0 software. For dichotomous data, we estimated the relative risk. For continuous data, we calculated the weighted mean difference.

MAIN RESULTS

Fifty-five qualified trials with 5261 advanced or late gastric cancer patients were identified, most of which were of low quality and used TCMHs plus chemotherapy compared with the same chemotherapy alone (41 trials). Except for four trials of Huachansu, we could not pool the results because no more than two used the same intervention or outcomes. TCMHs combined with or without chemotherapy in the 51 trials showed statistically significant difference for the improvement of mortality in six trials, quality of life in 13 trials, rate of remission in ten trials, discontinuation from treatment in three trials, leukopenia in one trial, vomiting/nausea in one trial. The pooled results from the four trials of Huachansu showed statistically significant difference for the improvement of leukopenia, but no significant difference for the improvement of adverse events in the digestive system or rate of short-term remission.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review did not provide assured evidence concerning the effectiveness of TCMHs in improving the quality of life or rate of remission, alleviating the toxic and side effects caused by the chemotherapy, or reducing short-term mortality. Limited and weak evidence showed that Huachansu, when used together with chemotherapy, improved leukopenia caused by chemotherapy, but did not improve rate of short-term remission. Large, well designed clinical trials are required urgently before any confident conclusions can be drawn about the value of TCMHs for advanced or late gastric cancer.