Overview: working inside, outside, and side by side to improve the quality of health care

A cluster randomized controlled trial comparing Virtual Learning Collaborative and Technical Assistance strategies to implement an early palliative care program for patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers: a study protocol

BACKGROUND

Virtual Learning Collaboratives (VLC), learning communities focused on a common purpose, are used frequently in healthcare settings to implement best practices. Yet, there is limited research testing the effectiveness of this approach compared to other implementation strategies. This study evaluates the effectiveness of a VLC compared to Technical Assistance (TA) among community oncology practices implementing ENABLE (Educate, Nurture, Advise, Before Life Ends), an evidence-based, early palliative care telehealth, psycho-educational intervention for patients with newly diagnosed advanced cancer and their caregivers.

METHODS

Using Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, Maintenance (RE-AIM) and Proctor's Implementation Outcomes Frameworks, this two-arm hybrid type-III cluster-randomized controlled trial (RCT) will compare two implementation strategies, VLC versus TA, among the 48 National Cancer Institute Community Oncology Research Program (NCORP) practice clusters that have not historically provided palliative care to all patients with advanced cancer. Three cohorts of practice clusters will be randomized to the study arms. Each practice cluster will recruit 15-27 patients and a family caregiver to participate in ENABLE. The primary study outcome is ENABLE uptake (patient level), i.e., the proportion of eligible patients who complete the ENABLE program (receive a palliative care assessment and complete the six ENABLE sessions over 12 weeks). The secondary outcome is overall program implementation (practice cluster level), as measured by the General Organizational Index at baseline, 6, and 12 months. Exploratory aims assess patient and caregiver mood and quality of life outcomes at baseline, 12, and 24 weeks. Practice cluster randomization will seek to keep the proportion of rural practices, practice sizes, and minority patients seen within each practice balanced across the two study arms.

DISCUSSION

This study will advance the field of implementation science by evaluating VLC effectiveness, a commonly used but understudied, implementation strategy. The study will advance the field of palliative care by building the capacity and infrastructure to implement an early palliative care program in community oncology practices.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Clinicaltrials.gov . NCT04062552; Pre-results. Registered: August 20, 2019. https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04062552?term=NCT04062552&draw=2&rank=1.

“There were more decisions and more options than just yes or no”: Evaluating a decision aid for advanced cancer patients and their family caregivers

Objective:

Few decision aids are available for patients with a serious illness who face many treatment and end-of-life decisions. We evaluated the Looking Ahead: Choices for Medical Care When You're Seriously Ill® patient decision aid (PtDA), one component of an early palliative care clinical trial.

Method:

Our participants included individuals with advanced cancer and their caregivers who had participated in the ENABLE (Educate, Nurture, Advise, Before Life Ends) early palliative care telehealth randomized controlled trial (RCT) conducted in a National Cancer Institute-designated cancer center, a U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs medical center, and affiliated outreach clinics in rural New England. ENABLE included six weekly patient and three weekly family caregiver structured sessions. Participants watched the Looking Ahead PtDA prior to session 3, which covered content on decision making and advance care planning. Nurse coaches employed semistructured interviews to obtain feedback from consecutive patient and caregiver participants approximately one week after viewing the Looking Ahead PtDA program (booklet and DVD).

Results:

Between April 1, 2011, and October 31, 2012, 57 patients (mean age = 64), 42% of whom had lung and 23% gastrointestinal cancer, and 20 caregivers (mean age = 59), 80% of whom were spouses, completed the PtDA evaluation. Participants reported a high degree of satisfaction with the PtDA format, as well as with its length and clarity. They found the format of using patient interviews “validating.” The key themes were: (1) “the earlier the better” to view the PtDA; (2) feeling empowered, aware of different options, and an urgency to participate in advance care planning.

Significance of results:

The Looking Ahead PtDA was well received and helped patients with a serious illness realize the importance of prospective decision making in guiding their treatment pathways. We found that this PtDA can help seriously ill patients prior to the end of life to understand and discuss future healthcare decision making. However, systems to routinely provide PtDAs to seriously ill patients are yet not well developed.

The gas cylinder, the motorcycle and the village health team member: a proof-of-concept study for the use of the Microsystems Quality Improvement Approach to strengthen the routine immunization system in Uganda

Background

Although global efforts to support routine immunization (RI) system strengthening have resulted in higher immunization rates, the World Health Organization (WHO) estimates that the proportion of children receiving recommended DPT3 vaccines has stagnated at 80% for the past 3 years (WHO Fact sheet—Immunization coverage 2014, WHO, 2014). Meeting the WHO goal of 90% national DPT3 coverage may require locally based strategies to support conventional approaches. The Africa Routine Immunization Systems Essentials-System Innovation (ARISE-SI) initiative is a proof-of-concept study to assess the application of the Microsystems Quality Improvement Approach for generating local solutions to strengthen RI systems and reach those unreached by current efforts in Masaka District, Uganda.

Methods

The ARISE-SI intervention had three components: health unit (HU) advance preparations, an action learning collaborative, and coaching of improvement teams. The intervention was informed and assessed using qualitative and quantitative methods. Data collection focused on changes and outcomes of improvement efforts among five HUs and one district-level team during the intervention (June 2011–February 2012) and five follow-up months.

Results

Workshops and team meetings had a 95% attendance rate. All teams gained RI system knowledge and implemented changes to address locally identified problems. Specific changes included: RI register implementation and expanded use, Child Health Card provision and monitoring, staff cross-training, staffing pattern changes, predictable outreach schedules, and health system leader—community leader meetings. Several RI system barriers prevalent across Masaka District (e.g., lack of backup HU gas cylinders, inadequate outreach transportation, and village health team underutilization) were successfully addressed. Three of five HUs significantly increased the vaccines administered. All improvements were sustained 5 months post-intervention. External evaluation validated the findings of high levels of participant engagement, empowerment to make change, and willingness to sustain improvements.

Conclusions

The Microsystems Quality Improvement Approach is a comprehensive approach, grounded in systems thinking, and coupled with intensive coaching. It provides a robust framework for engaging teams in the development of unique local solutions that strengthen RI systems in resource poor settings. The sustained improvements in local RI systems from this study provide evidence that this approach may be an effective framework for enhancing the WHO’s Reaching Every District (RED) immunization strategy.

Development of a Patient-Centered Antipsychotic Medication Adherence Intervention

OBJECTIVE

A substantial gap exists between patients and their mental health providers about patient's perceived barriers, facilitators, and motivators (BFMs) for taking antipsychotic medications. This article describes how we used an intervention mapping (IM) framework coupled with qualitative and quantitative item-selection methods to develop an intervention to bridge this gap with the goal of improving antipsychotic medication adherence.

METHODS

IM is a stepwise method for developing and implementing health interventions. A previous study conducted in-depth qualitative interviews with patients diagnosed with schizophrenia and identified 477 BFMs associated with antipsychotic medication adherence. This article reports the results of using a variety of qualitative and quantitative item reduction and intervention development methods to transform the qualitative BFM data into a viable checklist and intervention.

RESULTS

The final BFM checklist included 76 items (28 barriers, 30 facilitators, and 18 motivators). An electronic and hard copy of the adherence progress note included a summary of current adherence, top three patient-identified barriers and top three facilitators and motivators, clarifying questions, and actionable adherence tips to address barriers during a typical clinical encounter.

DISCUSSION

The IM approach supplemented with qualitative and quantitative methods provided a useful framework for developing a practical and potentially sustainable antipsychotic medication adherence intervention. A similar approach to intervention development may be useful in other clinical situations where a substantial gap exists between patients and providers regarding medication adherence or other health behaviors.

Developing successful models of cancer palliative care services

OBJECTIVES

This article describes successful institutionally based programs for providing high-quality palliative care to persons with cancer and their family members. Challenges and opportunities for program development are also described.

DATA SOURCES

Published literature from 2000 to present describing concurrent oncology palliative care clinical trials, standards, and guidelines were reviewed.

CONCLUSION

Clinical trials have shown feasibility and positive outcomes and formed the basis for consensus guidelines that support concurrent oncology palliative care models.

IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING PRACTICE

Oncology nurses should advocate for all patients with advanced cancer and their families to have access to concurrent oncology palliative care from the time of diagnosis with a life-limiting cancer.

Effects of a palliative care intervention on clinical outcomes in patients with advanced cancer: the Project ENABLE II randomized controlled trial

CONTEXT

There are few randomized controlled trials on the effectiveness of palliative care interventions to improve the care of patients with advanced cancer.

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of a nursing-led intervention on quality of life, symptom intensity, mood, and resource use in patients with advanced cancer.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

Randomized controlled trial conducted from November 2003 through May 2008 of 322 patients with advanced cancer in a rural, National Cancer Institute-designated comprehensive cancer center in New Hampshire and affiliated outreach clinics and a VA medical center in Vermont.

INTERVENTIONS

A multicomponent, psychoeducational intervention (Project ENABLE [Educate, Nurture, Advise, Before Life Ends]) conducted by advanced practice nurses consisting of 4 weekly educational sessions and monthly follow-up sessions until death or study completion (n = 161) vs usual care (n = 161).

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Quality of life was measured by the Functional Assessment of Chronic Illness Therapy for Palliative Care (score range, 0-184). Symptom intensity was measured by the Edmonton Symptom Assessment Scale (score range, 0-900). Mood was measured by the Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (range, 0-60). These measures were assessed at baseline, 1 month, and every 3 months until death or study completion. Intensity of service was measured as the number of days in the hospital and in the intensive care unit (ICU) and the number of emergency department visits recorded in the electronic medical record.

RESULTS

A total of 322 participants with cancer of the gastrointestinal tract (41%; 67 in the usual care group vs 66 in the intervention group), lung (36%; 58 vs 59), genitourinary tract (12%; 20 vs 19), and breast (10%; 16 vs 17) were randomized. The estimated treatment effects (intervention minus usual care) for all participants were a mean (SE) of 4.6 (2) for quality of life (P = .02), -27.8 (15) for symptom intensity (P = .06), and -1.8 (0.81) for depressed mood (P = .02). The estimated treatment effects in participants who died during the study were a mean (SE) of 8.6 (3.6) for quality of life (P = .02), -24.2 (20.5) for symptom intensity (P = .24), and -2.7 (1.2) for depressed mood (P = .03). Intensity of service did not differ between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSION

Compared with participants receiving usual oncology care, those receiving a nurse-led, palliative care-focused intervention addressing physical, psychosocial, and care coordination provided concurrently with oncology care had higher scores for quality of life and mood, but did not have improvements in symptom intensity scores or reduced days in the hospital or ICU or emergency department visits.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

clinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT00253383.

Panel-based pain management in primary care. a pilot study

Although pain is an extremely common symptom presenting to primary care physicians, it frequently is not optimally managed. The purpose of this feasibility study was to develop and pilot-test an efficient, rapid assessment and management approach for pain in busy community practices. The intervention utilized the Dartmouth COOP Clinical Improvement System (DCCIS) and a telephone-based, nurse-educator intervention. Patients from four primary care practices in rural New Hampshire and Vermont were screened by mail for the presence of persistent pain. Patients with mild to severe pain were randomized to either the usual care control group (n = 383) or the intervention group (n = 320). Patients who reported pain but no psychosocial problems received a summary of identified problems and targeted educational material via mail (DCCIS). Patients who reported pain and psychosocial problems received the DCCIS intervention and calls from a nurse-educator who provided pain self-management strategies and a problem-solving approach for psychosocial problems. Post-treatment evaluation revealed that patients in the intervention group scored significantly better on the Pain, Physical, Emotional, and Social subscales of the SF-36 and on the total score of the Functional Interference Scale, as compared to a usual care control group. Feasibility and acceptability of the approach were demonstrated; however, the conclusions based on analyses of the post-treatment outcomes were tempered by baseline imbalances across groups.