Multicentre randomized controlled trial of a nursing intervention for breathlessness in patients with lung cancer: Update of study progress

Holistic services for people with advanced disease and chronic or refractory breathlessness: a mixed-methods evidence synthesis

Background

Breathlessness is a common and distressing symptom of many advanced diseases, affecting around 2 million people in the UK. Breathlessness increases with disease progression and often becomes chronic or refractory. Breathlessness-triggered services that integrate holistic assessment and specialist palliative care input as part of a multiprofessional approach have been developed for this group, offering tailored interventions to support self-management and reduce distress.

Objectives

The aim was to synthesise evidence on holistic breathlessness services for people with advanced disease and chronic or refractory breathlessness. The objectives were to describe the structure, organisation and delivery of services, determine clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability, identify predictors of treatment response, and elicit stakeholders’ evidence-based priorities for clinical practice, policy and research.

Design

The mixed-methods evidence synthesis comprised three components: (1) a systematic review to determine the clinical effectiveness, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of holistic breathlessness services; (2) a secondary analysis of pooled individual data from three trials to determine predictors of clinical response; and (3) a transparent expert consultation (TEC), comprising a stakeholder workshop and an online consensus survey, to identify stakeholders’ priorities.

Results

Thirty-seven papers reporting on 18 holistic breathlessness services were included in the systematic review. Most studies enrolled people with thoracic cancer, were delivered over 4–6 weeks, and included breathing training, relaxation techniques and psychological support. Meta-analysis demonstrated significant reductions in the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) distress due to breathlessness, significant reductions in the Hospital Anxiety and Depressions Scale (HADS) depression scores, and non-significant reductions in the Chronic Respiratory Disease Questionnaire (CRQ) mastery and HADS anxiety, favouring the intervention. Recipients valued education, self-management interventions, and expertise of the staff in breathlessness and person-centred care. Evidence for cost-effectiveness was limited and inconclusive. The responder analysis (n = 259) revealed baseline CRQ mastery and NRS distress to be strong predictors of the response to breathlessness services assessed by these same measures, and no significant influence from baseline breathlessness intensity, patient diagnosis, lung function, health status, anxiety or depression. The TEC elicited 34 priorities from stakeholders. Seven priorities received high agreement and consensus, reflecting stakeholders’ (n = 74) views that services should be person-centred and multiprofessional, share their breathlessness management skills with others, and recognise the roles and support needs of informal carers.

Limitations

The evidence synthesis draws predominantly from UK services and may not be generalisable to other settings. Some meta-analyses were restricted by reporting biases and statistical heterogeneity.

Conclusions

Despite heterogeneity in composition and delivery, holistic breathlessness services are highly valued by recipients and can lead to significant improvements in the distress caused by breathlessness and depression. Outcomes of improved mastery and reduced distress caused by breathlessness are not influenced by patient diagnosis, lung function or health status. Stakeholders highlighted the need for improved access to person-centred, multiprofessional breathlessness services and support for informal carers.

Future work

Our research suggests that key therapeutic components of holistic breathlessness services be considered in clinical practice and models of delivery and educational strategies to address stakeholders’ priorities tested.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017057508.

Funding

The National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery programme. Matthew Maddocks, Wei Gao and Irene J Higginson are supported by the NIHR Collaboration for Leadership in Applied Health Research and Care (CLAHRC) South London; Matthew Maddocks is supported by a NIHR Career Development Fellowship (CDF-2017-009), William D-C Man is supported by the NIHR CLAHRC Northwest London and Irene J Higginson holds a NIHR Emeritus Senior Investigator Award.

Holistic services for people with advanced disease and chronic breathlessness: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Breathlessness is a common, distressing symptom in people with advanced disease and a marker of deterioration. Holistic services that draw on integrated palliative care have been developed for this group. This systematic review aimed to examine the outcomes, experiences and therapeutic components of these services.

METHODS

Systematic review searching nine databases to June 2017 for experimental, qualitative and observational studies. Eligibility and quality were independently assessed by two authors. Data on service models, health and cost outcomes were synthesised, using meta-analyses as indicated. Data on recipient experiences were synthesised thematically and integrated at the level of interpretation and reporting.

RESULTS

From 3239 records identified, 37 articles were included representing 18 different services. Most services enrolled people with thoracic cancer, involved palliative care staff and comprised 4-6 contacts over 4-6 weeks. Commonly used interventions included breathing techniques, psychological support and relaxation techniques. Meta-analyses demonstrated reductions in Numeric Rating Scale distress due to breathlessness (n=324; mean difference (MD) -2.30, 95% CI -4.43 to -0.16, p=0.03) and Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) depression scores (n=408, MD -1.67, 95% CI -2.52 to -0.81, p<0.001) favouring the intervention. Statistically non-significant effects were observed for Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire (CRQ) mastery (n=259, MD 0.23, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.55, p=0.17) and HADS anxiety scores (n=552, MD -1.59, 95% CI -3.22 to 0.05, p=0.06). Patients and carers valued tailored education, self-management interventions and expert staff providing person-centred, dignified care. However, there was no observable effect on health status or quality of life, and mixed evidence around physical function.

CONCLUSION

Holistic services for chronic breathlessness can reduce distress in patients with advanced disease and may improve psychological outcomes of anxiety and depression. Therapeutic components of these services should be shared and integrated into clinical practice.

REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42017057508.

Breathlessness services as a new model of support for patients with respiratory disease

The complexity of breathlessness in advanced disease requires a diversity of measures ideally tailored to the individual patient needs. ‘Breathlessness services’ have been systematically developed and tested to provide specific interventions and support for patients and their carers. The aim of this article is (1) to identify and describe components of breathlessness services and (2) to describe the clinical model of one specific service in more detail. This article is based on a systematic review evaluating randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-RCTs which examine the effectiveness of services aiming to improve breathlessness of patients with advanced disease. The Munich Breathlessness Service (MBS) is described in detail as an example of a recently set-up specialist service. Five service models were identified which were tested in six RCTs. Services varied regarding structure and composition with face-to-face meetings, some with additional telephone contacts. Service duration was median 6 weeks (range 2–12 weeks). Involved professions were nurses, various therapists and, in two models, also physicians. The breathing–thinking–functioning model was targeted by various service components. The MBS is run by a multi-professional team mainly with physicians and physiotherapists. Patients are seen weekly over 5–6 weeks with an individualized management plan. Breathlessness services are a new model for patients with advanced disease integrating symptom management and early access to palliative care.

WITHDRAWN: Non-pharmacological interventions for breathlessness in advanced stages of malignant and non-malignant diseases

This review is now out of date although it is correct as of the date of publication [Issue 2, 2008]. The authors are developing a new protocol which will replace this review. Publication of the protocol is expected in 2014, and serves to update the existing review and incorporate the latest evidence into a new Cochrane Review. The latest version of this review (available in 'Other versions' tab on The Cochrane Library) may still be useful to readers until the new review is published.

In 2016, the replacement review titled 'Non‐pharmacological interventions for breathlessness in advanced stages of malignant and non‐malignant diseases' was deregistered and split into four separate reviews of individual interventions: Respiratory interventions for breathlessness in adults with advanced diseases; Physical interventions for breathlessness in adults with advanced diseases; Cognitive‐emotional interventions for breathlessness in adults with advanced diseases; Multi‐dimensional interventions for breathlessness in adults with advanced diseases.

At September 2020, these replacement titles were deregistered (Multi‐dimensional interventions) or the protocols withdrawn (Cognitive‐emotional interventions; Multi‐dimensional interventions; Respiratory interventions) as they did not meet Cochrane standards or expectations.

The editorial group responsible for this previously published document have withdrawn it from publication.

Non-pharmacological interventions for breathlessness in advanced stages of malignant and non-malignant diseases

BACKGROUND

Breathlessness is a common and distressing symptom in the advanced stages of malignant and non-malignant diseases. Appropriate management requires both pharmacological and non-pharmacological interventions.

OBJECTIVES

The primary objective was to determine the effectiveness of non-pharmacological and non-invasive interventions to relieve breathlessness in participants suffering from the five most common conditions causing breathlessness in advanced disease.

SEARCH STRATEGY

We searched the following databases: The Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, British Nursing Index, PsycINFO, Science Citation Index Expanded, AMED, The Cochrane Pain, Palliative and Supportive Care Trials Register, The Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effectiveness in June 2007. We also searched various websites and reference lists of relevant articles and textbooks.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled and controlled clinical trials assessing the effects of non-pharmacological and non-invasive interventions to relieve breathlessness in participants described as suffering from breathlessness due to advanced stages of cancer, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD), interstitial lung disease, chronic heart failure or motor neurone disease.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed relevant studies for inclusion. Data extraction and quality assessment was performed by three review authors and checked by two other review authors. Meta-analysis was not attempted due to heterogeneity of studies.

MAIN RESULTS

Forty-seven studies were included (2532 participants) and categorised as follows: single component interventions with subcategories of walking aids (n = 7), distractive auditory stimuli (music) (n = 6), chest wall vibration (CWV, n = 5), acupuncture/acupressure (n = 5), relaxation (n = 4), neuro-electrical muscle stimulation (NMES, n = 3) and fan (n = 2). Multi-component interventions were categorised in to counselling and support (n = 5), breathing training (n = 3), counselling and support with breathing-relaxation training (n = 2), case management (n = 2) and psychotherapy (n = 2). There was a high strength of evidence that NMES and CWV could relieve breathlessness and moderate strength for the use of walking aids and breathing training. There is a low strength of evidence that acupuncture/acupressure is helpful. There is not enough data to judge the evidence for distractive auditory stimuli (music), relaxation, fan, counselling and support, counselling and support with breathing-relaxation training, case management and psychotherapy. Most studies have been conducted in COPD patients, only a few studies included participants with other conditions.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Breathing training, walking aids, NMES and CWV appear to be effective non-pharmacological interventions for relieving breathlessness in advanced stages of disease.