Objective: Specialized palliative care (SPC) interventions increasingly include patient-caregiver dyads, but their effects on dyadic coping are unknown. We investigated whether an SPC and dyadic psychological intervention increased aspects of dyadic coping in patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers, whether dyad characteristics moderated effects and whether aspects of dyadic coping mediated significant intervention effects on caregivers' anxiety and depression. Methods:We randomized 258 patients with incurable cancer and their caregivers to care as usual or accelerated transition from oncological treatment to home-based SPC and dyadic psychological support. In secondary outcome analyses, using mixedeffects models, we estimated intervention effects and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for communication of stress and common coping, and moderation by dyad type and demographics. In path analyses, we investigated whether stress communication and common coping mediated intervention effects on caregivers' symptoms of anxiety and depression. (Clinicaltrials.gov NCT01885637). Results:The intervention significantly increased common coping in patients and caregivers in couples (estimated difference, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.11 to 1.24) and stress communication by partner caregivers (0.97; 0.24 to 1.24). We found some support for different intervention effects for spouses and other dyads, but no evidence of mediation.Conclusions: Specialized palliative care and dyadic psychological intervention may affect aspects of dyadic coping. Common coping and stress communication did not mediate the previously found significant intervention effects on caregiver anxiety and depression, indicating that other mechanisms may have been central in the intervention.The stressful life with advanced cancer requires patients and caregivers to cope individually and together. 1,2 Multidisciplinary specialized palliative care (SPC) aims to relieve suffering in patients with life-threatening illness and their families 3 and can significantly improve quality of life of patients with advanced cancer. 4 According to the systemic transactional model of coping (STM), couples may cope with stressors such as cancer in individual and interactional ways. 2,5 Dyadic coping is a reciprocal process in which each partner's communication of stress serves to elicit support from the other partner, like helping with or taking over tasks (supportive/delegated coping), and common coping, ie, managing a problem together. 5 In patients with cancer, stress communication has been related to better dyadic adjustment 6 and quality of life. 7 Greater common coping efforts, such as joint problem-solving or relaxation, have been found to predict increased relationship quality and lower depressive symptoms in dyads coping with cancer 8 but have also been associated with lower distress in caregivers and increased distress in patients. 6 Psychological interventions targeting dyads of patients with advanced cancer and their partners or caregivers may significantly improve, eg, psy...
Background The improved survival after breast cancer has prompted knowledge on the effect of a breast cancer diagnosis on health-related quality of life (HQoL). This study compared changes in HQoL among women from before to after breast cancer diagnosis with longitudinal changes among women who remained breast cancer-free. Material and methods The Danish Diet, Cancer and Health study included 57 053 cancer-free persons aged 50-64 years at baseline (1993-1997). We used data from first follow-up (1999-2002) and second follow-up (2010-2012) on HQoL [Medical Outcomes Survey, short form (SF-36)] obtained from 542 women aged 64-82 years with primary breast cancer (stages I-III) and a randomly matched sample of 729 women who remained breast cancer-free. Linear regression models were used to estimate the differences in changes in HQoL between women with and without breast cancer; the analyses were repeated with stratification according to age, comorbidity, partner support and time since diagnosis. Results Women with breast cancer reported significantly larger decreases in HQoL from before to after diagnosis than those who remained breast cancer-free (physical component summary, -2.0; 95% CI -2.8; -1.2, mental component summary, -1.5, 95% CI -2.3; -0.6). This association was significantly modified by comorbidity and time since diagnosis. Conclusions Women with breast cancer reported significantly larger HQoL declines than breast cancer-free women. Breast cancer diagnosis seems to have the greatest impact on HQoL closest to diagnosis and in women with comorbidity indicating that this group should be offered timely and appropriate follow-up care to prevent HQoL declines.
Our results show that psychological intervention can be systematically integrated into SPC and that it appears feasible to provide dyadic needs-based sessions with an existential therapeutic approach. The Domus RCT will provide evidence of the efficacy of a novel model of multidisciplinary SPC.
BackgroundSpecialised palliative care trials often fail to address intervention effects on caregiver anxiety and depression, particularly in bereavement. We evaluate effects of specialised palliative care and dyadic psychological intervention on caregiver anxiety and depression in a randomised controlled trial (RCT).MethodsPatients with incurable cancer and limited antineoplastic treatment options and their caregivers, recruited from a university hospital oncology department, were randomised (1:1) to care as usual or accelerated transition from oncological treatment to home-based specialised palliative care. We assessed caregivers’ symptoms of anxiety and depression with the Symptom Checklist-92 up to six months after randomisation and 19 months into bereavement, and estimated intervention effects in mixed effects models.ResultsThe ‘Domus’ trial enrolled 258 caregivers. The intervention significantly attenuated increases in caregivers’ symptoms of anxiety overall (estimated difference, −0.12; 95% confidence interval, −0.22 to −0.01, p = 0.0266), and symptoms of depression at eight weeks (−0.17; −0.33 to −0.02; p = 0.0314), six months (−0.27; −0.49 to −0.05; p = 0.0165), and in bereavement at two weeks (−0.28; −0.52 to −0.03; p = 0.0295) and two months (−0.24; −0.48 to −0.01; p = 0.0448).ConclusionsThis first RCT evaluating specialised palliative care with dyadic psychological support significantly attenuated caregiver anxiety and depression before and during bereavement. (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01885637)
BackgroundThe focus of Specialized Palliative Care (SPC) is to improve care for patients with incurable diseases and their families, which includes the opportunity to make their own choice of place of care and ultimately place of death.The Danish Palliative Care Trial (DOMUS) aims to investigate whether an accelerated transition process from oncological treatment to continuing SPC at home for patients with incurable cancer results in more patients reaching their preferred place of care and death. The SPC in this trial is enriched with a manualized psychological intervention.Methods/DesignDOMUS is a controlled randomized clinical trial with a balanced parallel-group randomization (1:1). The planned sample size is 340 in- and outpatients treated at the Department of Oncology at Copenhagen University Hospital. Patients are randomly assigned either to: a) standard care plus SPC enriched with a standardized psychological intervention for patients and caregivers at home or b) standard care alone. Inclusion criteria are incurable cancer with no or limited antineoplastic treatment options.DiscussionPrograms that facilitate transition from hospital treatment to SPC at home for patients with incurable cancer can be a powerful tool to improve patients’ quality of life and support family/caregivers during the disease trajectory. The present study offers a model for achieving optimal delivery of palliative care in the patient’s preferred place of care and attempt to clarify challenges.Trial registrationClinicaltrials.gov Identifier: NCT01885637
Background: The focus of specialized palliative care is to improve quality of life for patients with incurable cancer and their relatives including an increased opportunity to make their own choice of place of care and death. Aim: To investigate whether a systematic fast-track transition from oncological treatment to specialized palliative care at home for patients with incurable cancer reinforced with a psychological dyadic intervention could result in more time spent at home and death at home. Secondary aims were to investigate effects on quality of life, symptomatology and survival. Design: A prospective, single-centre, randomized controlled trial ( Clinicaltrials.gov : NCT01885637). Setting/participants: In all, 340 patients with incurable cancer and no or limited antineoplastic treatment options. Results: No statistically significant difference was found regarding number of deaths (4%, p = 0.460) and time spent at home (3%, p = 0.491). The secondary outcomes indicated that the intervention resulted in improved quality of life (−11.6 ± 25.5, p = 0.005, effect size = −0.44, 95% confidence interval = −0.77; −0.11), social functioning (−15.8 ± 31.4, p = 0.001, effect size = −0.50, 95% confidence interval = −0.84; −0.17) and emotional functioning (−9.1 ± 21.2, p = 0.039, effect size = −0.43, 95% confidence interval = −0.76; −0.10) after 6 months. A linear mixed-effect regression model confirmed a possible effect on emotional and social functioning at 6 months. Regarding survival, no differences were found between groups ( p = 0.605). No adverse effects were seen as consequence of the intervention. Conclusions: The main findings indicated that the intervention had no effect on time spent at home or place of death. However, the intervention resulted in a weak improvement of quality of life, social functioning and emotional functioning after 6 months.
Context. Avoidable hospital admissions are important negative indicators of quality of end-of-life care. Specialized palliative care (SPC) may support patients remaining at home. Objectives. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to investigate if SPC at home could prevent hospital admissions in patients with incurable cancer. Methods. These are secondary results of Domus: a randomized controlled trial of accelerated transition to SPC with psychological intervention at home (Clinicaltrials.gov: NCT01885637). Participants were patients with incurable cancer and limited antineoplastic treatment options and their caregivers. They were included from the Department of Oncology, Rigshospitalet, Denmark, between 2013 and 2016. The control group received usual care. Outcomes were hospital admissions, causes thereof, and patient and caregiver perceptions of place of care (home, hospital, etc.) at baseline, four weeks, eight weeks, and six months. Results. During the study, 340 patients were randomized and 322 were included in modified intention-to-treat analyses. Overall, there were no significant differences in hospital admissions between the groups. The intervention group had more admissions triggered by worsened general health (22% vs. 16%, P ¼ 0.0436) or unmanageable home situation (8% vs. 4%, P ¼ 0.0119). After diagnostics, admissions were more often caused by clinical symptoms of cancer without progression in the intervention group (11% vs. 7%, P ¼ 0.0493). The two groups did not differ significantly in overall potentially avoidable admissions. Both groups felt mostly safe about their place of care. Conclusion. The intervention did not prevent hospital admissions. Likely, any intervention effects were outweighed by increased identification of problems in the intervention group leading to hospital admissions. Overall, patients and caregivers felt safe in their current place of care.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.