Bongioanni P, Borasio GD, Oliver DJ, Romagnoli A, Kapitza KP, Sidle K, Tramonti F. Methods for informing people with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/motor neuron disease of their diagnosis.
Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2023;
2:CD007593. [PMID:
36812393 PMCID:
PMC9944678 DOI:
10.1002/14651858.cd007593.pub2]
[Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/24/2023]
Abstract
BACKGROUND
Amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS), also known as motor neuron disease (MND), causes increasing physical impairment and disability. People with ALS/MND face huge physical challenges, and the diagnosis can be a source of great psychological distress for both people with ALS/MND and their carers. In such a context, how news of the diagnosis is broken is important. At present, there are no systematic reviews of methods for informing people with ALS/MND of their diagnosis.
OBJECTIVES
To examine the effects and effectiveness of different methods for informing people of a diagnosis of amyotrophic lateral sclerosis/motor neuron disease (ALS/MND), including effects on the person's knowledge and understanding of their disease, its treatment, and care; and on coping and adjustment to the effects of ALS/MND, its treatment, and care.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched the Neuromuscular Specialised Register, CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and two trials registers (February 2022). We contacted individuals or organisations to locate studies. We contacted study authors to obtain additional unpublished data.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We planned to include randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs of techniques for informing people with ALS/MND of their diagnosis. We planned to include adults (aged 17 years or over) with ALS/MND, according to the El Escorial criteria.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
Three review authors independently reviewed the results of the search to identify RCTs, and three review authors identified non-randomised studies to include in the discussion section. We planned that two review authors would independently extract data, and three would assess the risk of bias in any included trials.
MAIN RESULTS
We did not identify any RCTs that met our inclusion criteria.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
There are no RCTs that evaluate different communication strategies for breaking the bad news for people diagnosed with ALS/MND. Focused research studies are needed to assess the effectiveness and efficacy of different communication methods.
Collapse