Suppr超能文献

针对晚期非恶性疾病患者及其非正式照护者的呼吸急促干预服务的临床和成本效益:一项混合方法随机对照试验的混合结果。

The clinical and cost effectiveness of a Breathlessness Intervention Service for patients with advanced non-malignant disease and their informal carers: mixed findings of a mixed method randomised controlled trial.

作者信息

Farquhar Morag C, Prevost A Toby, McCrone Paul, Brafman-Price Barbara, Bentley Allison, Higginson Irene J, Todd Chris J, Booth Sara

机构信息

Primary Care Unit, Department of Public Health and Primary Care, University of Cambridge, Institute of Public Health, Robinson Way, Cambridge, CB2 0SR, UK.

Imperial Clinical Trials Unit, School of Public Health, Imperial College London, Stadium House, 68 Wood Lane, London, W12 7RH, UK.

出版信息

Trials. 2016 Apr 4;17:185. doi: 10.1186/s13063-016-1304-6.

Abstract

BACKGROUND

Breathlessness is the most common and intrusive symptom of advanced non-malignant respiratory and cardiac conditions. The Breathlessness Intervention Service (BIS) is a multi-disciplinary complex intervention, theoretically underpinned by a palliative care approach, utilising evidence-based non-pharmacological and pharmacological interventions to support patients with advanced disease in managing their breathlessness. Having published the effectiveness and cost effectiveness of BIS for patients with advanced cancer and their carers, we sought to establish its effectiveness, and cost effectiveness, in advanced non-malignant conditions.

METHODS

This was a single-centre Phase III fast-track single-blind mixed method RCT of BIS versus standard care for breathless patients with non-malignant conditions and their carers. Randomisation was to one of two groups (randomly permuted blocks). Eighty-seven patients referred to BIS were randomised (intervention arm n = 44; control arm n = 43 received BIS after four-week wait); 79 (91 %) completed to key outcome measurement. The primary outcome measure was 0-10 numeric rating scale for patient distress due to breathlessness at four weeks. Secondary outcome measures were Chronic Respiratory Questionnaire, Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, Client Service Receipt Inventory, EQ-5D and topic-guided interviews.

RESULTS

Qualitative analyses showed the positive impact of BIS on patients with non-malignant conditions and their carers; quantitative analyses showed a non-significant greater reduction in the primary outcome ('distress due to breathlessness'), when compared to standard care, of -0.24 (95 % CI: -1.30, 0.82). BIS resulted in extra mean costs of £799, reducing to £100 when outliers were excluded; neither difference was statistically significant. The quantitative findings contrasted with those previously reported for patients with cancer and their carers, which showed BIS to be both clinically and cost effective. For patients with non-malignant conditions there was a notable trend of improvement over both trial arms to the key measurement point; participants may have experienced a therapeutic effect from the research interviews, diluting the intervention's impact.

CONCLUSIONS

BIS had a statistically non-significant effect for patients with non-malignant conditions, and slightly increased service costs, but had a qualitatively positive impact consistent with findings for advanced cancer. Trials of palliative care interventions should consider multiple, mixed method, primary outcomes and ensure that protocols limit potential contaminating therapeutic effects in study designs.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN04119516 (December 2008); ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00678405 (May 2008).

摘要

背景

呼吸急促是晚期非恶性呼吸和心脏疾病最常见且困扰人的症状。呼吸急促干预服务(BIS)是一种多学科综合干预措施,理论上以姑息治疗方法为基础,利用循证非药物和药物干预措施来支持晚期疾病患者应对呼吸急促问题。在发表了BIS对晚期癌症患者及其护理人员的有效性和成本效益后,我们试图确定其在晚期非恶性疾病中的有效性和成本效益。

方法

这是一项单中心III期快速通道单盲混合方法随机对照试验,比较BIS与标准护理对患有非恶性疾病的呼吸急促患者及其护理人员的效果。随机分为两组(随机排列区组)。87名转诊至BIS的患者被随机分组(干预组n = 44;对照组n = 43,等待四周后接受BIS);79名(91%)完成了关键结局测量。主要结局指标是四周时患者因呼吸急促产生的痛苦的0 - 10数字评分量表。次要结局指标包括慢性呼吸问卷、医院焦虑抑郁量表、客户服务收据清单、EQ - 5D和主题引导访谈。

结果

定性分析显示BIS对患有非恶性疾病的患者及其护理人员有积极影响;定量分析显示,与标准护理相比,主要结局指标(“因呼吸急促产生的痛苦”)的降低幅度无显著差异,为-0.24(95%置信区间:-1.30,0.82)。BIS导致平均额外成本为799英镑,排除异常值后降至100英镑;两者差异均无统计学意义。定量研究结果与先前报道的癌症患者及其护理人员的结果形成对比,先前结果显示BIS在临床和成本效益方面均有效。对于患有非恶性疾病的患者,在两个试验组中到关键测量点均有显著的改善趋势;参与者可能从研究访谈中获得了治疗效果,从而削弱了干预措施的影响。

结论

BIS对患有非恶性疾病的患者在统计学上无显著效果,且略微增加了服务成本,但在定性方面有积极影响,与晚期癌症的研究结果一致。姑息治疗干预试验应考虑多种混合方法的主要结局指标,并确保方案在研究设计中限制潜在的干扰性治疗效果。

试验注册

当前受控试验ISRCTN04119516(2008年12月);ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00678405(2008年5月)。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/0f75/4820876/5123ce480585/13063_2016_1304_Fig1_HTML.jpg

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验