Correction: Supported: Supporting, enabling, and sustaining homecare workers to deliver end-of-life care: A qualitative study protocol

[This corrects the article DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0291525.].

Exploring pathways to optimise care in malignant bowel obstruction (EPOC): Protocol for a three-phase critical realist approach to theory-led intervention development for shared decision-making

INTRODUCTION

Malignant bowel obstruction is a distressing complication of cancer, causing pain, nausea and vomiting, and often has a poor prognosis. Severe and rapidly developing symptoms, a lack of robust clinical guidelines and the need for multidisciplinary input make treatment decision-making challenging. Sharing decision-making with people with malignant bowel obstruction and their caregivers can be difficult, and inconsistent communication creates serious deficiencies in care by amplifying patients' distress and uncertainty. Little attention has been paid to the implicit influences on this process-for example, the role of discipline-related norms and the beliefs of decision-makers. This study will explore how these processes work and develop interventions to improve shared decision-making.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

Exploring Pathways to Optimise Care (EPOC) is a three-phase study set within a critical realist framework: (i) realist review, to develop explanatory theory describing collaborative decision-making in the management of malignant bowel obstruction; (ii) an in-depth interview study using modified grounded theory to explore the active ingredients of this collaboration in practice settings; and (iii) the presentation to stakeholders (practitioners, patients and caregivers) of integrated results from Phase I (theory developed from the literature) and Phase II (theory developed from current practice) as a basis for intervention mapping. We aim to produce recommendations to address the challenges, and to develop a set of tools to (i) aid interaction around shared decision-making and (ii) aid interprofessional interaction around the management of this condition. Registration details: The realist review is registered with PROSPERO (CRD42022308251).

Turning a Curve: How People Use Everyday Resources to Negotiate Recovery From Cancer Treatment With Curative Intent

Many more cancers are treated with intent to cure now than in previous decades, but for most, this involves significant effects from which people need to recover psychologically and socially, as well as physically. This longitudinal photo-elicitation interview study uses grounded theory to explain how people discharged from specialist care made use of everyday social and material resources to manage this process at home. Recovery is presented as a curve in life's pathway requiring gradual reorientation, drawing on social worlds and domestic resources to calibrate this process. Findings are described in three stages: (1) responding to diagnosis and treatment, (2) using social resources for meaning-making, and (3) developing assets for recovery. During treatment, participants drew on past identities to reinforce their sense of self, and personalized health care communication supported this process. In the weeks after treatment, new frameworks of understanding were constructed from perspectives on cancer encountered in the family, workplace, and outpatient clinics. Recovery processes included the negotiation of personal change, the renegotiation of close relationships, and the use of everyday resources to regain three sensations: control, comfort, and continuity. Supportive care would benefit from an individualized exploration of the assets that can help people to negotiate this challenging phase as treatment comes to a close. Possibilities for self-care (the maintenance of health and well-being in the context of everyday life) can be explored and assessed through personalized discussion around the identities, social worlds, and everyday resources available to each individual.

Supported: Supporting, enabling, and sustaining homecare workers to deliver end-of-life care: A qualitative study protocol

BACKGROUND

Homecare workers provide essential care at home for people at end-of-life but are often poorly trained and supported.

AIM

To explore the experiences and needs of homecare workers and the views of homecare clients and carers, and other community-based health and social care staff about the homecare worker role, including identification of good practice.

METHODS

In this qualitative exploratory study, we will conduct 150 semi-structured interviews with homecare workers within three geographic English localities chosen for maximum socio-demographic variation. Eligible participants will be consenting adults providing care services (workers [n = 45], managers [n = 15] community practitioners [n = 30]), receiving care (clients thought to be in the last 6 months of life [n = 30], family carers [n = 15], or commissioners of homecare services supporting end-of-life care [n = 15]. Interviews may adopt a Pictor-guided or standard semi-structured approach according to their preference. Managers and commissioners can contribute to an online focus group if preferred. A range of recruitment strategies will be used, including through homecare agencies, local authorities, local NHS services, charities, voluntary sector groups and social media. Interviews and focus groups will be recorded, transcribed, anonymised, and analysed adopting a case-based approach for each geographic area within-case and then comparison across cases using reflexive thematic analysis. The design and analysis will be informed by Bronfenbrenner's Adapted Ecological Systems theory. This study is registered on the Research Registry (No.8613).

CONTRIBUTION

We will provide evidence on ways to improve the experiences and address the needs of homecare workers in relation to caring for people nearing end-of-life. It will offer insight into good practice around supporting homecare workers including responding to their training and development needs. Findings will inform subsequent stages of an evaluation-phase study of a training resource for homecare workers.

Development of a Core Outcome Set for the research and assessment of inoperable malignant bowel obstruction

BACKGROUND

Malignant bowel obstruction is experienced by 15% of people with advanced cancer, preventing them from eating and drinking and causing pain, nausea and vomiting. Surgery is not always appropriate. Management options include tube or stent drainage of intestinal contents and symptom control using medication. Published literature describing palliative interventions uses a broad range of outcome measures, few of which are patient-relevant. This hinders evidence synthesis, and fails to consider the perspectives of people undergoing treatment.

AIMS

To develop a Core Outcome Set for the assessment of inoperable malignant bowel obstruction with clinician, patient and caregiver involvement, using COMET methodology (Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials).

METHODS

A systematic review of clinical trials and observational studies, a rapid review of the qualitative literature and in-depth patient and clinician interviews were conducted to identify a comprehensive list of outcomes. Outcomes were compared and consolidated by the study Steering Group and Patient and Public Involvement contributors, and presented to an international clinical Expert Panel for review. Outcomes from the finalised list were rated for importance in a three-round international Delphi process: results of two survey rounds were circulated to respondents, and two separate consensus meetings were conducted with clinicians and with patients and caregivers via virtual conferencing, using live polling to reach agreement on a Core Outcome Set.

RESULTS

130 unique outcomes were identified. Following the independent Expert Panel review, 82 outcomes were taken into round 1 of the Delphi survey; 24 outcomes reached criteria for critical importance across all stakeholder groups and none reached criteria for dropping. All outcomes rated critically important were taken forward for re-rating in round 2 and all other outcomes dropped. In round 2, all outcomes were voted critically important by at least one stakeholder group. Round 2 outcomes were presented again at online consensus meetings, categorised as high ranking (n = 9), middle ranking (n = 7) or low ranking (n = 8). Stakeholders reached agreement on 16 core outcomes across four key domains: Symptom control, Life impact, Treatment outcomes, and Communication and patient preferences.

CONCLUSION

Use of this Core Outcome Set can help to address current challenges in making sense of the evidence around treatment for inoperable malignant bowel obstruction to date, and underpin a more robust future approach. Clearer communication and an honest understanding between all stakeholders will help to provide a basis for responsible decision-making in this distressing situation in clinical practice.

The range and suitability of outcome measures used in the assessment of palliative treatment for inoperable malignant bowel obstruction: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Malignant bowel obstruction, a complication of certain advanced cancers, causes severe symptoms which profoundly affect quality of life. Clinical management remains complex, and outcome assessment is inconsistent.

AIM

To identify outcomes evaluating palliative treatment for inoperable malignant bowel obstruction, as part of a four-phase study developing a core outcome set.

DESIGN

The review is reported in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA); PROSPERO (ID: CRD42019150648). Eligible studies included at least one subgroup with obstruction below the ligament of Treitz undergoing palliative treatment for inoperable malignant bowel obstruction. Study quality was not assessed because the review does not evaluate efficacy.

DATA SOURCES

Medline, Embase, the Cochrane Database, CINAHL, PSYCinfo Caresearch, Open Grey and BASE were searched for trials and observational studies in October 2021.

RESULTS

A total of 4769 studies were screened, 290 full texts retrieved and 80 (13,898 participants) included in a narrative synthesis; 343 outcomes were extracted verbatim and pooled into 90 unique terms across six domains: physiological, nutrition, life impact, resource use, mortality and survival. Prevalent outcomes included adverse events (78% of studies), survival (54%), symptom control (39%) and mortality (31%). Key individual symptoms assessed were vomiting (41% of studies), nausea (34%) and pain (33%); 19% of studies assessed quality of life.

CONCLUSIONS

Assessment focuses on survival, complications and overall symptom control. There is a need for definitions of treatment 'success' that are meaningful to patients, a more consistent approach to symptom assessment, and greater consideration of how to measure wellbeing in this population.

Symptom burden and lived experiences of patients, caregivers and healthcare professionals on the management of malignant bowel obstruction: A qualitative systematic review

BACKGROUND

Malignant bowel obstruction occurs in up to 50% of people with advanced ovarian and 15% of people with gastrointestinal cancers. Evaluation and comparison of interventions to manage symptoms are hampered by inconsistent evaluations of efficacy and lack of agreed core outcomes. The patient perspective is rarely incorporated.

AIM

To synthesise the qualitative data regarding patient, caregiver and healthcare professionals' views and experience of malignant bowel obstruction to inform the development of a core outcome set for the evaluation of malignant bowel obstruction.

DESIGN

A qualitative systematic review was conducted, with narrative synthesis. The review protocol was registered prospectively (https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero, CRD42020176393).

DATA SOURCES

MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, PsycINFO and Scopus databases were searched for studies published between 2010 and 2021. Reference lists were screened for further relevant publications, and citation tracking was performed.

RESULTS

Nine papers were included, reporting on seven studies which described the views and experiences of malignant bowel obstruction through the perspectives of 75 patients, 13 caregivers and 62 healthcare professionals. Themes across the papers included symptom burden, diverse experiences of interventions, impact on patient quality of life, implications and trajectory of malignant bowel obstruction, mixed experience of communication and the importance of realistic goals of care.

CONCLUSION

Some of the most devastating sequelae of malignant bowel obstruction, such as pain and psychological distress, are not included routinely in its clinical or research evaluation. These data will contribute to a wider body of work to ensure the patient and caregiver perspective is recognised in the development of a core outcome set.

Translating qualitative data into intervention content using the Theoretical Domains Framework and stakeholder co-design: a worked example from a study of cervical screening attendance in older women

Background

Previous screening interventions have demonstrated a series of features related to social determinants which have increased uptake in targeted populations, including the assessment of health beliefs and barriers to screening attendance as part of intervention development. Many studies cite the use of theory to identify methods of behaviour change, but fail to describe in detail how theoretical constructs are transformed into intervention content. The aim of this study was to use data from a qualitative exploration of cervical screening in women over 50 in the UK as the basis of intervention co-design with stakeholders using behavioural change frameworks. We describe the identification of behavioural mechanisms from qualitative data, and how these were used to develop content for a service-user leaflet and a video animation for practitioner training. The interventions aimed to encourage sustained commitment to cervical screening among women over 50, and to increase sensitivity to age-related problems in screening among primary care practitioners.

Methods

Secondary coding of a qualitative data set to extract barriers and facilitators of cervical screening attendance. Barrier and facilitator statements were categorised using the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF) to identify relevant behaviour change techniques (BCTs). Key TDF domains and associated BCTs were presented in stakeholder focus groups to guide the design of intervention content and mode of delivery.

Results

Behavioural determinants relating to attendance clustered under three domains: beliefs about consequences, emotion and social influences, which mapped to three BCTs respectively: (1) persuasive communication/information provision; (2) stress management; (3) role modelling and encouragement. Service-user stakeholders translated these into three pragmatic intervention components: (i) addressing unanswered questions, (ii) problem-solving practitioner challenges and (iii) peer group communication. Based on (ii), practitioner stakeholders developed a call to action in three areas – clinical networking, history-taking, and flexibility in screening processes. APEASE informed modes of delivery (a service-user leaflet and a cartoon animation for practitioners).

Conclusion

The application of the TDF to qualitative data can provide an auditable protocol for the translation of qualitative data into intervention content.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-022-07926-2.

Development of a core outcome set to use in the research and assessment of malignant bowel obstruction: protocol for the RAMBO study

INTRODUCTION

Studies regarding the management of malignant bowel obstruction (MBO) report conflicting findings. This is partly due to different outcome measures being used to evaluate severity of MBO and the response to treatments. Furthermore, current outcome measures focus mainly on measurable physiological parameters which may not correlate strongly with patient-defined quality of life. The development of core outcome sets allows a consistent approach to evaluating clinical conditions taking into consideration patient, healthcare professional and researcher viewpoints. It follows an internationally recognised standard methodology. We present a protocol for the development of a core outcome set for Research and Assessment of MBO (RAMBO).

METHODS

RAMBO is a multicentre study, comprising of four phases: a systematic review to examine current scope of outcome measures associated with MBO (phase I). Interviews with patients, companions and healthcare professionals will explore priorities and preferences for care and outcomes (phase II). An expert panel meeting will collate the findings into a set of outcomes (phase III), refined by consensus through a Delphi survey with key stakeholders (phase IV). The final set of outcomes will be ratified at a consensus meeting. Each step will actively include patient partners. Thematic analysis and descriptive statistics will be used to analyse qualitative and quantitative data, respectively.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval was obtained (Wales REC 5, REF: 19/LO/1876). Study participants and relevant stakeholders will be updated with newsletters and a lay summary at the end of the study. Abstracts will be submitted to national and international conferences, result papers will be submitted to peer-reviewed, open access journals.

TRIAL AND PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBERS

Core Outcome Measures in Effectiveness Trials (1402); Systematic Literature Review (CRD42019150648); Rapid Review (CRD42020176393).

Can comprehensive specialised end-of-life care be provided at home? Lessons from a study of an innovative consultant-led community service in the UK

The Midhurst Macmillan Specialist Palliative Care Service (MMSPCS) is a UK, medical consultant-led, multidisciplinary team aiming to provide round-the-clock advice and care, including specialist interventions, in the home, community hospitals and care homes. Of 389 referrals in 2010/11, about 85% were for cancer, from a population of about 155 000. Using a mixed method approach, the evaluation comprised: a retrospective analysis of secondary-care use in the last year of life; financial evaluation of the MMSPCS using an Activity Based Costing approach; qualitative interviews with patients, carers, health and social care staff and MMSPCS staff and volunteers; a postal survey of General Practices; and a postal survey of bereaved caregivers using the MMSPCS. The mean cost is about 3000 GBP (3461 EUR) per patient with mean cost of interventions for cancer patients in the last year of life 1900 GBP (2192 EUR). Post-referral, overall costs to the system are similar for MMSPCS and hospice-led models; however, earlier referral avoided around 20% of total costs in the last year of life. Patients and carers reported positive experiences of support, linked to the flexible way the service worked. Seventy-one per cent of patients died at home. This model may have application elsewhere.

The Pictor technique: a method for exploring the experience of collaborative working

Collaborative working is a crucial part of contemporary health and social care. Researching the experiences of those involved--as professionals, patients, or carers--is challenging, given the complexity of many cases and the taken-for-granted nature of roles and identities in relation to it. In this article we introduce the Pictor technique for exploring experiences of collaborative working. This is a visual technique in which participants construct a representation of roles and relationships in a particular case using arrow-shaped adhesive notes or cards. The chart so produced helps the participant tell the story of his or her experience and serves as a focus for further exploration with the researcher. We describe the background to Pictor and illustrate its use with professionals, patients, and carers, drawing on recent and current research. We examine how Pictor relates to other visual methods, and conclude by considering how the technique might be developed in the future.