Randomised controlled trials of palliative care – a survey of the views of advanced cancer patients and their relatives

Preliminary Results from a Phase IV Surveillance Study of Medical Cannabis Use in Australian Patients With Advanced Cancer Receiving Palliative Care

Introduction: Our research group is conducting three large randomized placebo-controlled trials of medicinal cannabis for cancer symptoms. All participants are invited to take part in a posttrial surveillance study. Methods: Participants were given the manufacturers dosing instructions and liberty to titrate to effect. Data were collected on symptoms (Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale [ESAS] score), perceived benefits, adverse effects, satisfaction with the product, and dose/frequency. Results: Twenty-six percent of eligible participants consented to take part in the surveillance study. Most participants changed their self-titrated dose at least once. Pain, sleep, and mood were the most frequently cited symptoms which improved. Fatigue, nausea, and cognitive impairment were the most frequently mentioned adverse effects. Conclusion: Participants felt confident making changes to their medicinal cannabis dose within the limits suggested by the manufacturer of each product. A number of benefits and adverse effects were ascribed to the product. Benefits were similar to those described in previous studies.

Palliative care inpatients favour research participation irrespective of prognosis, performance or socioeconomic status: multicentre cohort study

OBJECTIVES

Palliative care needs to embrace research to guide service development and effective symptom management. Healthcare professionals often feel research is too burdensome for patients who have poor performance status or are near the end of life. Many studies exclude these groups from participating.We aimed to identify whether specialist palliative care inpatients would wish to take part in research and whether preference varies according to study design, demographics, diagnosis, performance status and prognosis.

METHODS

100 inpatients in two National Health Service specialist palliative care units and one independent hospice in the Northeast of England completed a short questionnaire about preferences for involvement in research.

RESULTS

92% of participants stated they were interested in being involved in research. This was mostly unaffected by age, diagnosis, prognosis, performance and socioeconomic status. Three-quarters were within the last 3 months of life. Simple questions or interviews were the preferred methodology, whereas only half of patients would want further investigations or additional medications and fewer still wanted to participate in online activities, lifestyle change or group activities.

CONCLUSIONS

Palliative care inpatients welcome the opportunity to be involved in research and should not be excluded on the grounds of advanced disease, poor prognosis and low performance status.

When a dying patient is asked to participate in a double-blind, placebo-controlled clinical trial on symptom control: The decision-making process and experiences of relatives

BACKGROUND

Placebo-controlled trials can provide evidence to inform end-of-life care, but it is contested whether asking dying patients to participate in such trials is morally justifiable. To investigate the experiences of these patients is even more complex. Therefore, proxy assessments by relatives can be a good alternative.

AIM

To explore the experience of participating in a placebo-controlled trial at the end of life from the perspective of bereaved relatives.

DESIGN

Mixed-method study, including questionnaires and interviews.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

The SILENCE study was a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial on the efficacy of scopolamine butylbromide to prevent death rattle. The study was performed in six inpatient hospice facilities. Patients were asked to participate at admission in the hospice. Three months after the death of the patient, bereaved relatives were invited to fill in a questionnaire and to participate in an interview. One hundred four questionnaires were completed and 17 relatives were interviewed.

RESULTS

Fourteen percent of the relatives participating in the questionnaire study considered the participation of their loved one in research a bit burdensome and 10% considered it a bit stressful. Seventeen percent thought that it was a bit burdensome for the patient. Eighty-three percent considered participation in this type of research (very) valuable. The in-depth interviews showed that patients and relatives jointly decided about participation in this double-blind placebo-controlled medication trial. Relatives generally respected and felt proud about patients' decision to participate.

CONCLUSION

The large majority of bereaved relatives experienced the participation of their dying love one in this RCT as acceptable and valuable.

Using a qualitative sub-study to inform the design and delivery of randomised controlled trials on medicinal cannabis for symptom relief in patients with advanced cancer

BACKGROUND

Recruitment for randomised controlled trials in palliative care can be challenging; disease progression and terminal illness underpin high rates of attrition. Research into participant decision-making in medicinal cannabis randomised controlled trials (RCTs) is very limited. Nesting qualitative sub-studies within RCTs can identify further challenges to participation, informing revisions to study designs and recruitment practices. This paper reports on findings from a qualitative sub-study supporting RCTs of medicinal cannabis for symptom burden relief in patients with advanced cancer in one Australian city.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with 48 patients with advanced cancer, eligible to participate in a medicinal cannabis RCT (n=28 who consented to participate in an RCT; n=20 who declined). An iterative and abductive approach to thematic analysis and data collection fostered exploration of barriers and enablers to participation.

RESULTS

Key enablers included participants' enthusiasm and expectations of medicinal cannabis as beneficial (to themselves and future patients) for symptom management, especially after exhausting currently approved options, and a safer alternative to opioids. Some believed medicinal cannabis to have anti-cancer effects. Barriers to participation were the logistical challenges of participating (especially due to driving restrictions and fatigue), reluctance to interfere with an existing care plan, cost, and concerns about receiving the placebo and the uncertainty of the benefit. Some declined due to concerns about side-effects or a desire to continue accessing cannabis independent of the study.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings support revisions to subsequent medicinal cannabis RCT study designs, namely, omitting a requirement that participants attend weekly hospital appointments. These findings highlight the value of embedding qualitative sub-studies into RCTs. While some challenges to RCT recruitment are universal, others are context (population, intervention, location) specific. A barrier to participation found in research conducted elsewhere-stigma-was not identified in the current study. Thus, findings have important implications for those undertaking RCTs in the rapidly developing context of medical cannabis.

Knowledge, attitudes, and perception of 398 cancer patients toward participation in clinical trials: A single-center study from New Delhi, India

Background and Objective:

Clinical trials are considered to be the gold standard research methodology for evaluating the efficacy and safety of healthcare interventions.

Materials and Methods:

A cross-sectional study was conducted using standardized self-administered questionnaires prepared by the research team and statistician. The questionnaires were offered to cancer patients presented at a tertiary care center.

Results:

We surveyed 398 cancer patients, 193 (48.5%) males and 205 (51.5%) females with a mean (±standard deviation) 55.39 (±13.59) of age in years. Out of total, only 59 (14.82%) had the prior knowledge of the clinical trial. Forty-three (10.80%) participants were willing to participate in clinical trials.

Conclusion:

Cancer patients had preconceived notions and myths that linger in our society that clinical trial participation will harm them. The researchers/oncologists need to explore the rationale, objectives, and benefits of taking part in clinical trials and make it easy to understand by cancer patients.

Benefits of Study Participation for Patients with Advanced Cancer Receiving Radiotherapy: A Prospective Observational Study

Background

Patients with advanced cancer and bone metastases may have unmet palliative care (PC) needs that go unnoticed during clinical oncological practice. This observational study describes interventions that were initiated as the patients participated in the Palliative Radiotherapy and Inflammation Study (PRAIS). It was hypothesized that the patients would benefit from study participation due to PC interventions initiated by the study team.

Methods

A retrospective review of patients' electronic records. Patients with advanced cancer and painful bone metastases included in PRAIS were eligible. All patients met with the study team before start of radiotherapy, after completion of Patient Reported Outcome Measures. Interventions initiated by the study team were documented in the patients' electronic records.

Results

A total of 133 patients were reviewed: 63% males, mean (standard deviation [SD]) age 65 (9.6) and mean (SD) Karnofsky performance status (KPS) score 73.2 (9.1). Interventions were initiated in 50% (n = 67) of the patients. Changes in opioid management (69%), treatment of constipation (43%), and nausea (24%) and nutritional advice were most frequent (21%). Patients receiving interventions had lower mean KPS (70 vs. 77 p < 0.001), shorter survival time after study inclusion (median 28 vs. 57.5 weeks p = 0.005) and were more often opioid naïve (12% vs. 39% p < 0.001) than those not receiving interventions by the study team.

Conclusions

Patients with advanced cancer and painful bone metastasis benefited from study participation due to multiple PC interventions initiated by the study team. The findings call for a systematic integration of PC in patients with advanced cancer.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02107664.

The Possibility of Conducting a Clinical Trial on Palliative Care: A Survey of Whether a Clinical Study on Cancer Dyspnea Is Acceptable to Cancer Patients and Their Relatives

CONTEXT

Conducting randomized controlled trials on palliative care is difficult owing to barriers like fragility of the patients' health status and health care providers' concerns for patients. However, quality randomized controlled trials are required for care improvement.

OBJECTIVES

To investigate the willingness of cancer patients and their relatives to participate in a clinical study on cancer dyspnea and identify feasible clinical study designs for this condition.

METHODS

A nationwide, cross-sectional, web-based survey was conducted with 206 cancer patients and 206 relatives of cancer patients. Their willingness to participate in clinical studies on cancer dyspnea and factors influencing this willingness were assessed in two scenarios: outpatients receiving anticancer treatment and terminally ill inpatients.

RESULTS

About 23% patients and 23% relatives were willing to participate in clinical trials while 40% and 32%, respectively, were unwilling. Factors related to patient participation were quick and easy trials (outpatient 57%, terminally ill 53%) and oral medication with minimal potential side effects (outpatient 48%). Factors related to unwillingness to participate were placebo-controlled trials (outpatient 51%, terminally ill 50%), disagreements about participation between patients and families (outpatient 49%, terminally ill 49%), and continuous injections (outpatient 61%, terminally ill 47%). Compared to patients, relatives responded more reluctantly, especially for patients in terminal care. Conversely, patients were less reluctant in the terminal setting than the outpatient setting.

CONCLUSION

Some patients and relatives were reluctant to participate in clinical trials on cancer dyspnea. Thus, trials need to be minimally invasive, quick, and fully explained to and understood by patients and families.

Views of patients with advanced disease and their relatives on participation in palliative care research

Background

Patients with advanced disease may not be invited to participate in research based on the assumption that participation would be too burdensome for them. The aim of this study was to explore how patients with advanced disease and their relatives evaluate their experience with research participation.

Method

This study used data from two parts of a larger project. The first dataset was a cross-sectional questionnaire study focused on priorities at the end of life. The second dataset used a longitudinal design with structured interviews on prognostic awareness. In both studies, participants evaluated their experience on a 5-point Likert scale and specified their motivation in an open-ended question.

Data were collected in 6 hospitals in the Czech Republic with patients with advanced disease and life expectancy less than 1 year and their relatives. Data were analysed using non-parametric tests and thematic analysis.

Results

First dataset consisted of 167 patients and 102 relatives, and second dataset consisted of 135 patients and 92 relatives (in total, 496 respondents). Results were similar in both datasets, with half of the sample (53%, 48%) scoring neutral, and over 30% of the sample identified their experience as interesting. The most significant factors associated with the evaluation were religiosity (p = 0.001) and the type of diagnosis (p = 0.04). Motivation for participation was to improve care, support research, express own opinion, opportunity to talk and trusting relationship.

Conclusions

Patients with advanced disease and relatives do not mind participating in palliative care research, and it can be even a positive experience for them.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12904-021-00779-2.

Study recruitment factors in advanced cancer: the Prognosis in Palliative care Study II (PiPS2) - a multicentre, prospective, observational cohort project

OBJECTIVES

The Prognosis in Palliative care Study II (PiPS2) was a large multicentre observational study validating prognostic tools in patients with advanced cancer. Many palliative care studies fail to reach their recruitment target. To inform future studies, PiPS2 rigorously monitored and identified any potential recruitment barriers.

METHODS

Key recruitment stages (ie, whether patients were eligible for the study, approached by the researchers and whether consent was obtained for enrolment) were monitored via comprehensive screening logs at participating sites (inpatient hospices, hospitals and community palliative care teams). The reasons for patients' ineligibility, inaccessibility or decision not to consent were documented.

RESULTS

17 014 patients were screened across 27 participating sites over a 20-month recruitment period. Of those, 4642 (27%) were ineligible for participation in the study primarily due to non-cancer diagnoses. Of 12 372 eligible patients, 9073 (73%) were not approached, the most common reason being a clinical decision not to do so. Other reasons included patients' death or discharge before they were approached by the researchers. Of the 3299 approached patients, 1458 (44%) declined participation mainly because of feeling too unwell, experiencing severe distress or having other competing priorities. 11% (n=1841/17 014) of patients screened were enrolled in the study, representing 15% (n=1841/12 372) of eligible patients. Different recruitment patterns were observed across inpatient hospice, hospital and community palliative care teams.

CONCLUSIONS

The main barrier to recruitment was 'accessing' potentially eligible patients. Monitoring key recruitment stages may help to identify barriers and facilitators to enrolment and allow results to be put into better context.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ISRCTN13688211.

The effects of a family-centered psychosocial-based nutrition intervention in patients with advanced cancer: the PiCNIC2 pilot randomised controlled trial

Background

Malnutrition in advanced cancer patients is common but limited and inconclusive data exists on the effectiveness of nutrition interventions. Feasibility and acceptability of a novel family-based nutritional psychosocial intervention were established recently. The aims of this present study were to assess the feasibility of undertaking a randomised controlled trial of the latter intervention, to pilot test outcome measures and to explore preliminary outcomes.

Methods

Pilot randomised controlled trial recruiting advanced cancer patients and family caregivers in Australia and Hong Kong. Participants were randomised and assigned to one of two groups, either a family-centered nutritional intervention or the control group receiving usual care only. The intervention provided 2–3 h of direct dietitian contact time with patients and family members over a 4–6-week period. During the intervention, issues with nutrition impact symptoms and food or eating-related psychosocial concerns were addressed through nutrition counselling, with a focus on improving nutrition-related communication between the dyads and setting nutritional goals. Feasibility assessment included recruitment, consent rate, retention rate, and acceptability of assessment tools. Validated nutritional and quality of life self-reported measures were used to collect patient and caregiver outcome data, including the 3-day food diary, the Patient-Generated Subjective Global Assessment Short Form, the Functional Assessment Anorexia/Cachexia scale, Eating-related Distress or Enjoyment, and measures of self-efficacy, carers’ distress, anxiety and depression.

Results

Seventy-four patients and 54 family caregivers participated in the study. Recruitment was challenging, and for every patient agreeing to participate, 14–31 patients had to be screened. The consent rate was 44% in patients and 55% in caregivers. Only half the participants completed the trial’s final assessment. The data showed promise for some patient outcomes in the intervention group, particularly with improvements in eating-related distress (p = 0.046 in the Australian data; p = 0.07 in the Hong Kong data), eating-related enjoyment (p = 0.024, Hong Kong data) and quality of life (p = 0.045, Australian data). Energy and protein intake also increased in a clinically meaningful way. Caregiver data on eating-related distress, anxiety, depression and caregiving burden, however, showed little or no change.

Conclusions

Despite challenges with participant recruitment, the intervention demonstrates good potential to have positive effects on patients’ nutritional status and eating-related distress. The results of this trial warrant a larger and fully-powered trial to ascertain the effectiveness of this intervention.

Trial registration

The trial was registered with the Australian & New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry, registration number ACTRN12618001352291.

What influenced people with chronic or refractory breathlessness and advanced disease to take part and remain in a drug trial? A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Recruitment and retention in clinical trials remains an important challenge, particularly in the context of advanced disease. It is important to understand what affects retention to improve trial quality, minimise attrition and reduce missing data. We conducted a qualitative study embedded within a randomised feasibility trial and explored what influenced people to take part and remain in the trial.

METHODS

We conducted a qualitative study embedded within a double-blind randomised trial (BETTER-B[Feasibility]: BETter TreatmEnts for Refractory Breathlessness) designed using a person-centred approach. Participants with cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), interstitial lung disease (ILD), or chronic heart failure (CHF), with a modified Medical Research Council dyspnoea scale grade of 3/4 were recruited from three UK sites. A convenience subsample completed qualitative interviews after the trial. Interviews were analysed using thematic analysis. Results were considered in relation to the core elements of person-centred care and our model of the person-centred trial.

RESULTS

In the feasibility trial 409 people were screened for eligibility, and 64 were randomised. No participant was lost to follow-up. Twenty-two participants took part in a qualitative interview. Eleven had a diagnosis of COPD, 8 ILD, 2 CHF and 1 lung cancer. The participants' median age was 71 years (range 56-84). Sixteen were male. Twenty had completed the trial, and two withdrew due to adverse effects. The relationship between patient and professional, potential for benefit, trial processes and the intervention all influenced the decision to participate in the trial. The relationship with the research team and continuity, perceived benefit, and aspects relating to trial processes and the intervention influenced the decision to remain in the trial.

CONCLUSIONS

In this feasibility trial recruitment targets were met, attrition levels were low, and aspects of the person-centred approach were viewed positively by trial participants. Prioritisation of the relationship between the patient and professional; person-centred processes, including home visits, assistance with questionnaires, and involvement of the carer; and enabling people to participate by having processes in line with individual capabilities appear to support recruitment and retention in clinical trials in advanced disease. We recommend the integration of a person-centred approach in all clinical trials.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN32236160. Registered on 13 June 2016.

Evaluating recruitment methods of patients with advanced cancer: a pragmatic opportunistic comparison

Background

Recruitment of patients with advanced cancer into studies is challenging.

Objective

To evaluate recruitment methods in a study of pharmacist-led cancer pain medicine consultations and produce recommendations for future studies.

Method

Two methods of recruitment were employed: (1) community-based (general practitioner computer search, identification by general practitioner, community pharmacist or district nurse and hospital outpatient list search) and (2) hospice-based (in and outpatient list search). Patients identified in method 1 were invited by post and in method 2 were invited face-to-face. Information was designed in collaboration with patients and carers.

Results

A total of 128 patients were identified (85 from the community and 43 from the hospice), and 47 met the inclusion criteria. Twenty-three agreed to take part and 19 completed the study, 17 of whom were already under specialist palliative care. Recruitment rates were 7% for community-based methods and 40% for hospice. The recruitment methods differed in intensity of resource use. Recruitment via letter and a lack of engagement by healthcare professionals were found to be barriers. Facilitators included the researcher having personal involvement in recruitment.

Conclusion

The overall recruitment rate was in line with other studies for this patient cohort. Attempts to identify and engage patients through community-based postal contact were less effective than where personal contact with patients was both possible and occurred. Methods were less successful at recruiting patients who were not already engaged with hospice services.

A community pharmacist medicines optimisation service for patients with advanced cancer pain: a proof of concept study

Background Patients with advanced cancer commonly experience pain and it is least controlled in community settings. Community pharmacists in the UK already offer medicines optimisation consultations although not for this patient group. Objective To determine whether medicines consultations for patients with advanced cancer pain are feasible and acceptable. Setting Community-dwelling patients with advanced cancer pain were recruited from primary, secondary and tertiary care using purposive sampling in one UK city. Methods One face-to-face or two telephone delivered medicines optimisation consultations by pharmacists were tested. These were based on services currently delivered in UK community pharmacies. Feedback was obtained from patients and healthcare professionals involved to assess feasibility and acceptability. Main outcome measure Recruitment, acceptability and drug related problems. Results Twenty-three patients, (range 33-88 years) were recruited, 19 completed consultation(s) of whom 17 were receiving palliative care services. Five received face-to-face consultations and 14 by telephone during which 47 drug related problems were identified from 33 consultations (mean 2.5). Advice was provided for 34 drug related problems in 17 patients and referral to other healthcare professionals for 13 in 8 patients, 2 patients had none. Eleven patients returned questionnaires of which 8 (73%) would recommend the consultations to others. Conclusion The consultations were feasible as patients were recruited, retained, consultations delivered, and data collected. Patients found the 20-30 min intervention acceptable, found a self-perceived increase in medicines knowledge and most would recommend it to others. Community pharmacists were willing to carry out these services however they had confidence issues in accessing working knowledge. Most drug related problems were resolved by the pharmacists and even among patients receiving palliative care services there were still issues concerning analgesic management. Pharmacist-conducted medicines consultations demonstrate potential which now needs to be evaluated within a larger study in the future.

Pharmacist educational interventions for cancer pain management: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

Educational interventions by pharmacists for patients with cancer pain aim to improve pain management, but little is known about the different components of interventions and their effectiveness. Our aim was to assess the benefit of pharmacist delivered educational interventions for patients with cancer pain. A systematic review and meta-analysis of experimental trials testing pharmacist delivered educational interventions for cancer pain was carried out to identify the components of interventions and effectiveness at improving pain-related outcomes for patients with cancer. A literature review was conducted in EMBASE, MEDLINE, CINAHL, PsycINFO, ASSIA, Web of Science and CENTRAL from inception until January 2018 searching for educational interventions involving a pharmacist for patients with cancer pain. Four studies were included involving 944 patients. Meta-analysis was carried out where possible.

KEY FINDINGS

Meta-analysis of three of the four studies found that mean pain intensity in the intervention group was reduced by 0.76 on a 0-10 scale (95% confidence interval), although only two of the studies used validated measures of pain. Improvements in knowledge, side effects and patient satisfaction were seen although with less reliable measures.

SUMMARY

Pharmacist educational interventions for patients with cancer pain have been found to show promise in reducing pain intensity. Studies were few and of varying quality. Further, good quality studies should be carried out in this area and these should be comprehensively reported. Trials measuring patient self-efficacy and patient satisfaction are needed before the impact of the pharmacist delivered interventions on these outcomes can be established.

Recommendations for patient engagement in patient-oriented emergency medicine research

OBJECTIVE

To make pragmatic recommendations on best practices for the engagement of patients in emergency medicine (EM) research.

METHODS

We created a panel of expert Canadian EM researchers, physicians, and a patient partner to develop our recommendations. We used mixed methods consisting of 1) a literature review; 2) a survey of Canadian EM researchers; 3) qualitative interviews with key informants; and 4) feedback during the 2017 Canadian Association of Emergency Physicians (CAEP) Academic Symposium.

RESULTS

We synthesized our literature review into categories including identification and engagement, patients' roles, perceived benefits, harms, and barriers to patient engagement; 40/75 (53% response rate) invited researchers completed our survey. Among respondents, 58% had engaged patients in research, and 83% intended to engage patients in future research. However, 95% stated that they need further guidance to engage patients. Our qualitative interviews revealed barriers to patient engagement, including the need for training and patient partner recruitment.Our panel recommends 1) an overarching positive recommendation to support patient engagement in EM research; 2) seven policy-level recommendations for CAEP to support the creation of a national patient council, to develop, adopt and adapt training material, guidelines, and tools for patient engagement, and to support increased patient engagement in EM research; and 3) nine pragmatic recommendations about engaging patients in the preparatory, execution, and translational phases of EM research.

CONCLUSION

Patient engagement can improve EM research by helping researchers select meaningful outcomes, increase social acceptability of studies, and design knowledge translation strategies that target patients' needs.

Dying persons' perspectives on, or experiences of, participating in research: An integrative review

BACKGROUND

Conducting research with dying persons can be controversial and challenging due to concerns for the vulnerability of the dying and the potential burden on those who participate with the possibility of little benefit.

AIM

To conduct an integrative review to answer the question 'What are dying persons' perspectives or experiences of participating in research?

DESIGN

A structured integrative review of the empirical literature was undertaken.

DATA SOURCES

Cumulative Index Nursing and Allied Health Complete, PsycINFO, MEDLINE, Informit and Embase databases were searched for the empirical literature published since inception of the databases until February 2017.

RESULTS

From 2369 references, 10 papers were included in the review. Six were qualitative studies, and the remaining four were quantitative. Analysis revealed four themes: value of research, desire to help, expression of self and participation preferences. Dying persons value research participation, regarding their contribution as important, particularly if it provides an opportunity to help others. Participants perceived that the potential benefits of research can and should be measured in ways other than life prolongation or cure. Willingness to participate is influenced by study type or feature and degree of inconvenience.

CONCLUSION

Understanding dying persons' perspectives of research participation will enhance future care of dying persons. It is essential that researchers do not exclude dying persons from clinically relevant research due to their prognosis, fear or burden or perceived vulnerability. The dying should be afforded the opportunity to participate in research with the knowledge it may contribute to science and understanding and improve the care and treatment of others.

Home parenteral nutrition increases fat free mass in patients with incurable gastrointestinal cancer. Results of a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

Preventing loss of muscle mass and function is an enduring challenge in malnourished patients with incurable cancer. The benefit of supplemental home parenteral nutrition has not been firmly established. Our aim was to evaluate the effects of supplemental home parenteral nutrition, the primary endpoint being fat free mass (FFM) and secondary: muscle function, quality of life and overall survival.

DESIGN AND METHODS

In a single centre open-label randomised controlled trial, patients with incurable gastrointestinal cancer, nutritionally at risk, were randomly assigned to either; a) best practice nutritional care and dietetic counselling (non-sHPN) or b) dietetic counselling and supplemental home parenteral nutrition (sHPN group). Treatment duration was 24 weeks with visits every six weeks for five scheduled visits. Main outcome was gain in bioelectrical impedance analyses (BIA) estimated FFM. Secondary outcomes were muscle strength, quality of life and survival.

RESULTS

Eligible for inclusion were 234 patients, 47 of these accepted enrolment; 25 were randomized to non-sHPN and 22 to sHPN according to performance status, age and diagnoses. Median age was 66.9 (41.5-88.2), BMI 21.3 (14.8-35.7) and (91%) were receiving palliative chemotherapy. Median FFM and fat free mass index increased in the sHPN group. At 12 weeks a significant difference (p < 0.01) was found between the groups; in the sHPN group 69% of the patients (versus 40%) increased their FFM. Handgrip strength increased in both groups but without significance between the two. Quality of life at 12 weeks was significantly better (p < 0.05) in the sHPN group. No difference was noticed in survival, median 169 (CI 88-295) days versus 168 (CI 80-268) days. Study completion was accomplished by 36%; 60% died before end of study.

CONCLUSIONS

Providing supplemental home parenteral nutrition may prevent loss of FFM, and it is even possible to increase FFM in patients with incurable gastrointestinal cancer. Supplementation with parenteral nutrition might have a temporarily positive impact on quality of life.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

(NCT02066363) www.clinicaltrials.gov.

A screening tool for predicting gatekeeping behaviour

AIM

To develop a typology and screening tool for gatekeeping behaviours by nurses responsible for recruitment in palliative care research.

DESIGN

Concurrent analysis.

METHOD

Two focus groups were conducted in 2015 with nine qualified hospice community nurses involved in recruitment to a trial in palliative care. The literature was searched for research into gatekeeping from 2000-2016. All narrative examples of gatekeeping activity were coded using gerunds. Common codes were then grouped and interpreted as a social process.

RESULTS

Gatekeeping is normal and should be expected. A continuum typology emerged, ranging from unintentional to active disengagement. Justification ranged from forgetting to deliberately not mentioning the study for fear of burdening patients. Viewing gatekeeping as a continuum allowed for the creation of a screening tool designed to collaboratively discuss and hence mitigate specific types of gatekeeping behaviour before they occur. This is a unique international contribution to this persistent issue.

A systematic review of reasons for gatekeeping in palliative care research

BACKGROUND

When healthcare professionals or other involved parties prevent eligible patients from entering a trial as a research subject, they are gatekeeping. This phenomenon is a persistent problem in palliative care research and thought to be responsible for the failure of many studies.

AIM

To identify potential gatekeepers and explore their reasons for gatekeeping in palliative care research.

DESIGN

A 'Review of Reasons' based on the systematic Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses approach and a thematic synthesis.

DATA SOURCE

PubMed, Embase, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature and PsycINFO from 2000 to May 20 2015 were searched. Studies in children (aged <18 years) and patients with dementia were excluded.

RESULTS

Thirty papers on gatekeeping in palliative care research were included. Five groups of potential gatekeepers were identified: healthcare professionals, research ethics committees, management, relatives and researchers. The fear of burdening vulnerable patients was the most reported reason for gatekeeping. Other reasons included 'difficulty with disclosure of health status', 'fear of burdening the patient's relatives', 'doubts about the importance or quality of the study', 'reticent attitude towards research and (research) expertise' and 'logistics'. In hospice and homecare settings, the pursuit of comfort care may trigger a protective attitude. Gatekeeping is also rooted in a (perceived) lack of skills to recruit patients with advanced illness.

CONCLUSION

Gatekeeping is motivated by the general assumption of vulnerability of patients, coupled with an emphasis on the duty to protect patients. Research is easily perceived as a threat to patient well-being, and the benefits appear to be overlooked. The patients' perspective concerning study participation is needed to gain a full understanding and to address gatekeeping in palliative care research.

How Accurately Do Consecutive Cohort Audits Predict Phase III Multisite Clinical Trial Recruitment in Palliative Care?

CONTEXT

Audits have been proposed for estimating possible recruitment rates to randomized controlled trials (RCTs), but few studies have compared audit data with subsequent recruitment rates.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the accuracy of estimates of potential recruitment from a retrospective consecutive cohort audit of actual participating sites and recruitment to four Phase III multisite clinical RCTs.

METHODS

The proportion of potentially eligible study participants estimated from an inpatient chart review of people with life-limiting illnesses referred to six Australian specialist palliative care services was compared with recruitment data extracted from study prescreening information from three sites that participated fully in four Palliative Care Clinical Studies Collaborative RCTs. The predominant reasons for ineligibility in the audit and RCTs were analyzed.

RESULTS

The audit overestimated the proportion of people referred to the palliative care services who could participate in the RCTs (pain 17.7% vs. 1.2%, delirium 5.8% vs. 0.6%, anorexia 5.1% vs. 0.8%, and bowel obstruction 2.8% vs. 0.5%). Approximately 2% of the referral base was potentially eligible for these effectiveness studies. Ineligibility for general criteria (language, cognition, and geographic proximity) varied between studies, whereas the reasons for exclusion were similar between the audit and pain and anorexia studies but not for delirium or bowel obstruction.

CONCLUSION

The retrospective consecutive case note audit in participating sites did not predict realistic recruitment rates, mostly underestimating the impact of study-specific inclusion criteria. These findings have implications for the applicability of the results of RCTs. Prospective pilot studies are more likely to predict actual recruitment.

Exploring research participation among cancer patients: analysis of a national survey and an in-depth interview study

Background

Inequalities in cancer research participation are thought to exist with certain groups under-represented in research populations; however, much of the evidence is based on small-scale studies. The aim of this study was to explore data from in-depth interviews with cancer patients and a large national survey to investigate variation in who is asked to participate in research and who takes part.

Methods

Factors associated with research discussion and participation were explored in National Cancer Patient Experience Survey data using multivariate logistic regression and during in-depth interviews with 25 breast cancer patients.

Results

Survey data were available for 66,953 cancer patients; 30.4 % reported having discussions about, and 18.9 % took part in, research. Barriers to participation at staff, patient and trust level were evident; for example, staff were less likely to discuss research with older patients, Asian and black patients were less likely to take part and patients treated at specialist or teaching trusts had higher levels of discussion and participation. Interviews showed that patients’ willingness to participate changed over time and was not synonymous with participation as some were ineligible.

Conclusion

Some patient groups were less likely to have discussions about or participate in research. Analysis of this variation vis-à-vis the composition of the patient population may be useful to ensure that there is equity regarding the potential benefits of research participation and that research findings are applicable to target populations in the translational model.

Ethical challenges and solutions regarding delirium studies in palliative care

CONTEXT

Delirium occurs commonly in settings of palliative care (PC), in which patient vulnerability in the unique context of end-of-life care and delirium-associated impairment of decision-making capacity may together present many ethical challenges.

OBJECTIVES

Based on deliberations at the Studies to Understand Delirium in Palliative Care Settings (SUNDIPS) meeting and an associated literature review, this article discusses ethical issues central to the conduct of research on delirious PC patients.

METHODS

Together with an analysis of the ethical deliberations at the SUNDIPS meeting, we conducted a narrative literature review by key words searching of relevant databases and a subsequent hand search of initially identified articles. We also reviewed statements of relevance to delirium research in major national and international ethics guidelines.

RESULTS

Key issues identified include the inclusion of PC patients in delirium research, capacity determination, and the mandate to respect patient autonomy and ensure maintenance of patient dignity. Proposed solutions include designing informed consent statements that are clear, concise, and free of complex phraseology; use of concise, yet accurate, capacity assessment instruments with a minimally burdensome schedule; and use of PC friendly consent models, such as facilitated, deferred, experienced, advance, and proxy models.

CONCLUSION

Delirium research in PC patients must meet the common standards for such research in any setting. Certain features unique to PC establish a need for extra diligence in meeting these standards and the employment of assessments, consent procedures, and patient-family interactions that are clearly grounded on the tenets of PC.

'Best practice' in developing and evaluating palliative and end-of-life care services: a meta-synthesis of research methods for the MORECare project

BACKGROUND

Improved and cost-effective palliative and end-of-life care is an international policy imperative. Developments are impeded by a weak and often inconsistent evidence base.

AIM

To examine the main methodological challenges and limitations to developing and evaluating palliative and end-of-life care services and requirements to further this field of research.

DESIGN

A meta-synthesis to systematically appraise the evidence from systematic reviews on the research methods used in studies evaluating the effectiveness of palliative care services for patients with advanced illness and/or carers meeting inclusion and quality criteria. We extracted data from the reviews on the methodological issues reported on the included studies into Excel spreadsheets and generated textual descriptions coded and analysed in NVivo.

DATA SOURCES

Six electronic databases, reference chaining and expert advice.

RESULTS

In total, 27 systematic reviews were included on the effectiveness of palliative care services for patients with cancer (n = 6), advanced illness (n = 10) or mixed populations (n = 11) across care settings. Main methodological challenges were implementation as a continuum, active precise recruitment, addressing randomisation and economic evaluation beyond cost savings.

CONCLUSIONS

The complexity of delivering and evaluating palliative and end-of-life care services requires the accumulation of knowledge from multiple sources to understand the active components of an intervention to deliver patient benefit and examine the evaluation methods to detect change and reveal processes prior to a definitive trial. The implementation of evidence into practice should form a continuum throughout the evaluation stages to reveal understanding on the process of intervention delivery, the context and the intended outcome(s).

Clinical effectiveness of online training in palliative care of primary care physicians

BACKGROUND

Primary care physicians (PCPs) have a major responsibility in the management of palliative patients. Online palliative care (PC) education has not been shown to have a clinical impact on patients that is equal or different to traditional training.

OBJECTIVE

This study tested the clinical effectiveness of online PC education of physicians through impact on symptom control, quality of life (QOL), caregiver satisfaction, and knowledge-attitude of physicians at 18 months of the intervention.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized clinical trial. Subjects were 169 physicians randomly assigned to receive the online model or traditional training. Consecutive patients with advanced cancer requiring PC were included. Physicians and patients completed the Palliative Care Outcome Scale (POS), and patients the Brief Pain Inventory (BPI) and the Rotterdam Symptom Checklist (RSCL) twice, 7 to 10 days apart. Caregivers completed the SERVQUAL. Physicians' level of knowledge-attitude was measured at 18 months.

RESULTS

Sixty-seven physicians enrolled 117 patients. The intervention group had reduced scores for pain, symptoms, and family anxiety. The global RSCL scale showed a difference between groups. There was no significant difference in the questionnaires used. Caregiver satisfaction was comparable between groups. Physicians in the intervention group significantly increased their knowledge without any differences in attitude. Online training was completed by 86.6% in the intervention group, whereas 13.4% in the control group accessed traditional training.

CONCLUSIONS

Participation in an online PC education program by PCPs improved patient scores for some symptoms and family anxiety on the POS and also showed improved global QOL. Significant differences were found in physicians' knowledge at short and long term.

Overcoming barriers to recruitment in care of the dying research in hospitals

CONTEXT

Approximately 40% of the U.S. and 60% of the U.K. population die in hospital. Many reports have highlighted variability in the care received by these patients and national initiatives have proposed strategies to improve this care. No studies have demonstrated whether any improvements in end-of-life care have been achieved, as research in this area is challenging.

OBJECTIVES

We designed a study to assess the feasibility of a novel method of identifying patients likely to die during an acute hospital admission and a model of prior consent from patients and/or assent from their relatives.

METHODS

A study for collecting data on patients' symptoms before and after the introduction of an end-of-life tool (comprising medical and nursing checklists, prescribing guidance, and a symptom observation chart) within five wards in a major U.K. teaching hospital was conducted. We asked the screening question to a senior member of staff, "Is this patient so unwell that you feel they could die on this admission?" to identify appropriate patients, and recruited using the consent procedure. Patients were enrolled in the study if they became more unwell and data were then collected until they died.

RESULTS

In total, 6642 patients were screened. The ward staff answered "yes" to the screening question for 327 of 6642 (4.9%) patients. Patient's prior consent or relative's assent to enroll in the study was obtained for 117 of 327 (35.8%) patients, of whom 70 of 117 (59.8%) enrolled for the study and died within the study period. The staff found that the methods used were appropriate.

CONCLUSION

We have shown that identifying and involving dying patients in research is possible and acceptable to patients and carers.

Off-label prescribing in palliative care - a cross-sectional national survey of palliative medicine doctors

BACKGROUND

Regulatory bodies including the European Medicines Agency register medications (formulation, route of administration) for specific clinical indications. Once registered, prescription is at clinicians' discretion. Off-label use is beyond the registered use. While off-label prescribing may, at times, be appropriate, efficacy and toxicity data are often lacking.

AIM

The aim of this study was to document off-label use policies (including disclosure and consent) in Australian palliative care units and current practices by palliative care clinicians.

DESIGN

A national, cross-sectional survey was conducted online following an invitation letter. The survey asked clinicians their most frequent off-label medication/indication dyads and unit policies. Dyads were classified into unregistered, off-label and on-label, and for the latter, whether medications were nationally subsidised.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

All Australian palliative medicine Fellows and advanced trainees.

RESULTS

Overall, 105 clinicians responded (53% response rate). The majority did not have policies on off-label medications, and documented consent rarely. In all, 236 medication/indication dyads for 36 medications were noted: 45 dyads (19%) were for two unregistered medications, 118 dyads (50%) were for 26 off-label medications and 73 dyads (31%) were for 12 on-label medications.

CONCLUSIONS

Off-label prescribing with its clinical, legal and ethical implications is common yet poorly recognised by clinicians. A distinction needs to be made between where quality evidence exists but registration has not been updated by the pharmaceutical sponsor and the evidence has not been generated. Further research is required to quantify any iatrogenic harm from off-label prescribing in palliative care.

Factors affecting recruitment to an observational multicentre palliative care study

Objectives

To identify those factors which adversely affected recruitment to a large multicentre palliative care study.

Methods

Patient accrual to a multicentre, observational, palliative care study was monitored at three critical junctures in the research process. (1) Eligibility—did the patient fulfil the study entry criteria? (2) Accessibility—was it possible to access the patient to be able to inform them about the study? (3) Consent—did the patient agree to participate in the study? The reasons why patients were ineligible, inaccessible or refused consent were recorded.

Results

12 412 consecutive referrals to participating clinical services were screened for study inclusion of whom 5394 (43%) were deemed to be ineligible. Of the remaining patients 4617/7018 (66%) were inaccessible to the research team. The most common reasons being precipitous death, ‘gatekeeping’ by clinical staff or rapid discharge. Of the 2410 patients who were visited by the research team and asked to participate in the study 1378 (57%) declined. Overall 8.2% (1018/12 412) of patients screened participated in the study. There were significant differences in recruitment patterns between hospice inpatient units, hospital support and community palliative care teams.

Conclusions

Systematic monitoring and analysis of patient flows through the clinical trial accrual process provided valuable insights about the reasons for failure to recruit patients to a clinical trial and may help to improve recruitment in future studies.

Unique perception of clinical trials by Korean cancer patients

BACKGROUND

In the past few years, the number of clinical trials has increased rapidly in East Asia, especially for gastric and hepatobiliary cancer that are prevalent in Asian populations. However, the actual degree of understanding or perceptions of clinical trials by cancer patients in East Asian countries have seldom been studied.

METHODS

Between July 1st and November 30th of 2011, we conducted a prospective study to survey cancer patients regarding their awareness of, and willingness to participate in, a clinical trial. Patients with gastrointestinal/hepatobiliary cancer who visited the Hematology-Oncology outpatient clinic at Samsung Medical Center (SMC) were enrolled. A total of 21 questions were asked including four questions which used the Visual analogue scale (VAS) score.

RESULTS

In this survey study, 1,000 patients were asked to participate and 675 patients consented to participate (67.5%). The awareness of clinical trials was substantially higher in patients who had a higher level of education (p<0.001), were married (p=0.004), and had a higher economic status (p=0.001). However, the willingness to participate in a clinical trial was not affected by the level of education or economic status of patients. The most influential factors for patient willingness to participate were a physician recommendation (n=181, 26.8%), limited treatment options (n=178, 26.4%), and expectations of effectiveness of new anti-cancer drugs (n=142, 21.0%). Patients with previous experience in clinical trials had a greater willingness to participate in clinical trials compared to patients without previous experience (p<0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

This large patient cohort survey study showed that Korean cancer patients are more aware of clinical trials, but awareness did not translate into willingness to participate.

Patient, caregiver, health professional and researcher views and experiences of participating in research at the end of life: a critical interpretive synthesis of the literature

Background

The development of the evidence-base informing end of life (EoL) care is hampered by the assumption that patients at the EoL are too vulnerable to participate in research. This study aims to systematically and critically review the evidence regarding the experiences and views of patients, caregivers, professionals and researchers about participation in EoL care research, and to identify best practices in research participation.

Methods

We searched seven electronic databases, and hand searched three journals and the bibliographies of relevant papers. Inclusion criteria were original research papers on involvement in EoL care research or its impact on participants. Critical interpretive synthesis was used to integrate the whole body of empirical evidence on this topic and generate theoretical categories from the evidence.

Results

Of a total of 239 identified studies, 20 studies met the inclusion criteria, from: the US (11), the UK (6) and Australia (3). Most focused on patients with cancer (12) and were conducted in hospices (9) or hospitals (7). Studies enquired about issues related to: EoL care research in general (5), specific research methods (13), and trial research (2). The studies evaluating willingness to participate in EoL care research showed positive outcomes across the different parties involved in research. Factors influencing willingness were mainly physical and cognitive impairment. Participating in research was a positive experience for most patients and carers but a minority experienced distress. This was related to: characteristics of the participants; the type of research; or the way it was conducted. Participatory study designs were found particularly suitable for enabling the inclusion of a wide range of participants.

Conclusion

The evidence explored within this study demonstrates that the ethical concerns regarding patient participation in EoL care research are often unjustified. However, research studies in EoL care require careful design and execution that incorporates sensitivity to participants’ needs and concerns to enable their participation. An innovative conceptual model for research participation relevant for potentially vulnerable people was developed.

The acceptability of e-technology to monitor and assess patient symptoms following palliative radiotherapy for lung cancer

E-technology is increasingly used in oncology to obtain self-reported symptom assessment information from patients, although its potential to provide a clinical monitoring tool in palliative care is relatively unexplored in the UK. This study aimed to evaluate the support provided to lung cancer patients post palliative radiotherapy using a computerized assessment tool and to determine the clinical acceptability of the tool in a palliative care setting. However, of the 17 clinicians identified as managing patients who met the initial eligibility criteria for the study, only one clinician gave approval for their patient to be contacted regarding participation, therefore the benefits of this novel technology could not be assessed. Thirteen key clinicians from the centres involved in the study were subsequently interviewed. They acknowledged potential benefits of incorporating computerized patient assessment from both a patient and practice perspective, but emphasized the importance of clinical intuition over standardized assessment. Although clinicians were positive about palliative care patients participating in research, they felt that this population of patients were normally too old, with too rapidly deteriorating a condition to participate in a study using e-technology. In order to encourage acceptance of e-technology within palliative care, emphasis is needed on actively promoting the contribution of technologies with the potential to improve patient outcomes and the patient experience.

Formal feasibility studies in palliative care: why they are important and how to conduct them

The concept of clinical trial feasibility is of great interest to the community of palliative care researchers, clinicians, and granting agencies. Significant allocation of resources is required in the form of funding, time, intellect, and motivation to carry out clinical research, and understandably, clinical investigators, institutions, and granting agencies are disappointed when funded trials are unsuccessfully conducted. We argue that for many trials conducted in palliative care, the feasibility of conducting the proposed trial should be formally explored before implementation. There is substantial information available within the literature on the topic of study feasibility but no singular guide on how one can pragmatically apply this advice in the palliative care setting. We suggest that a Formal Feasibility Study for palliative care trials should be commonly conducted before development of a larger pivotal trial, to prospectively identify barriers to research, develop strategies to address these barriers, and predict whether the larger study is feasible. If a Formal Feasibility Study is not required, elements of feasibility can be specifically tested before launching clinical trials. The purpose of this article is to offer a draft framework for the design and conduct of a Formal Feasibility Study that, if implemented, could concretely support successful completion of high-quality research in a timely fashion. Additionally, we hope to foster dialogue within the palliative care research community regarding the relevance of establishing feasibility before initiation of definitive trials in the palliative care population.

Experience with palliative care in patients with advanced cancer at a tertiary care hospital in a developing country

The importance of palliative care in patients with advanced cancer is established. Reports on the experience with palliative care in the Middle East region are limited. A prospective study was performed to characterize the palliative care experience at a tertiary care center in Lebanon and to identify the profile of patients requiring palliative care. This communication highlights the results of the study. Authors conclude that the profile of needs for individuals requiring palliative care in Lebanon is similar to westernized countries. Revisiting the continuum of cancer care is called for to better identify the optimal timing of intervention and avoid end of life distress.

The attitudes of 1066 patients with cancer towards participation in randomised clinical trials

Background:

Barriers to randomised clinical trial (RCT) recruitment include failure to identify eligible patients, reluctance of staff to approach them and attitudes of some health-care professionals and patients. As part of a larger UK prospective study examining the communication and involvement in RCTs of 22 multidisciplinary teams in Wales, we also assessed the attitudes of patients they treat towards trials.

Methods:

Out of 1146 patients attending outpatient departments who were approached, 1146 (93%) completed the seven-item Attitudes to Randomised Trials Questionnaire (ARTQ), probing their general attitudes towards medical research and likely participation in a hypothetical two-arm RCT.

Results:

Randomisation initially deterred many patients from endorsing a willingness to participate. However, if information about the trial logic, voluntary nature and rights to withdraw were provided, together with further treatment details, 83% (886 out of 1066) would potentially participate. Other variables associated with a positive inclination towards participation included previous trial experience (P<0.01), male gender (P<0.01) and younger age, with patients ⩾70 years less likely to consider trial entry (P<0.01).

Conclusion:

The majority of patients were receptive to RCT participation. Many of those initially disinclined because of randomisation would consider joining if given further details that form part of standard GCP consent guidelines. These data show the importance and need for clear communication and information to encourage RCT participation. Evidence-based training courses are available to assist with this.

The efficacy of haloperidol in the management of nausea and vomiting in patients with cancer

CONTEXT

Haloperidol is used commonly for the control of nausea and vomiting (N/V) in palliative care patients, but there is very little evidence to support its use.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the efficacy of haloperidol as an antiemetic in patients with cancer and N/V not related to cancer treatment.

METHODS

Patients with an N/V score of at least 1 on a 4-point scale were prescribed either oral or subcutaneous haloperidol. N/V and toxicity were assessed daily for the duration of the study (maximum five days) by both the patient and an observer (health professional).

RESULTS

At Day 2, 33 of 42 (79%) treated patients were assessable for response. Eight (24%; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 10%-39%) patients had complete control of N/V and 12 (36%; 95% CI: 20%-53%) had partial control, giving an overall response rate of 61% (95% CI: 44%-77%). At Day 5, 23 patients were assessable for response. The overall response rate was 17 of 23 (74%; 95% CI: 56%-92%). If all patients are included in the response analysis, the overall response rates at Days 2 and 5 were 47% and 40%, respectively.

CONCLUSION

Haloperidol has some efficacy in the treatment of N/V in this patient group. The results from this uncontrolled study provide pilot data from which to plan future controlled trials of antiemetics in the palliative care population.

A proposed taxonomy of terms to guide the clinical trial recruitment process

CONTEXT

The successful conduct of clinical trials in palliative care is challenged by low accrual rates, high attrition of study patients during trials, difficulties managing comorbidity, and other factors. But what has been learned about improving the feasibility of palliative care research studies?

OBJECTIVE

To develop standard terms to describe patient accrual, and using these terms, describe an approach to allow investigators to predict trial feasibility.

METHODS

We proposed a standard language and definitions for specific elements of feasibility within clinical trial design and conduct. We then developed an approach to apply data generated from the use of these terms to allow researchers to predict feasibility at the design stage of a clinical trial's development.

RESULTS

We developed a taxonomy and then retrospectively applied the approach to four trials selected from our library of completed studies, to provide preliminary validity evidence. The approach includes a framework to help predict the number of patients needed to be assessed to achieve a study's accrual targets, as part of ongoing operational oversight to monitor the conduct and feasibility of a clinical trial.

CONCLUSION

Challenges to successful completion of palliative care trials are prevalent and serious. A taxonomy to characterize the eligible patient pool, and an approach by which feasibility is systematically investigated, hold the promise to enhance the effectiveness of scarce resources applied to palliative and end-of-life research.

The feasibility of a single-blinded fast-track pragmatic randomised controlled trial of a complex intervention for breathlessness in advanced disease

Background

The Breathlessness Intervention Service is a novel service for patients with intractable breathlessness regardless of aetiology. It is being evaluated using the Medical Research Council's framework for the evaluation of complex interventions. This paper describes the feasibility results of Phase II: a single-blinded fast-track pragmatic randomised controlled trial.

Methods

A single-blinded fast-track pragmatic randomised controlled trial was conducted for patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease referred to the service. Patients were randomised to either receive the intervention immediately for an eight-week period, or receive the intervention after an eight-week period on a waiting list during which time they received standard care. Outcomes examined included: response rates to the trial; response rates to the individual questionnaires and items; comments relating to the trial functioning made during interviews with patients, carers, referrers and service providers; and, researcher fieldwork notes.

Results

16 of the 20 eligible patients agreed to participate in a recruitment visit (16/20); 14 respondents went on to complete a recruitment visit/baseline interview. The majority of those who completed a recruitment visit/baseline interview completed the RCT protocol (13/14); 12 of their carers were recruited and completed the protocol. An unblinding rate of 6/25 respondents (patients and carers) was identified. Missing data were minimal and only one patient was lost to follow up. The fast-track trial methodology proved feasible and acceptable. Two of the baseline/outcome measures proved unsuitable: the WHO performance scale and the Schedule for the Evaluation of Individual Quality of Life-Direct Weighting (SEIQoL-DW).

Conclusion

This study adds to the evidence that fast-track randomised controlled trials are feasible and acceptable in evaluations of palliative care interventions for patients with non-malignant conditions. Reasonable response rates and low attrition rates were achieved. Further, with adequate preparation of the research and randomisation teams, clinicians, and responders, and effective liaison with the clinicians, single-blinding proved possible. Methods were identified to reduce unblinding through careful attention to the type of data collected at unblinded measurement points; the content of interviews should be carefully considered when designing blinded-trial protocols.

Trial registration

Clinical Trials.gov NCT00711438