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.

There is a lack of controlled clinical trials and organizational descriptions regarding home-based SPC for patients with advanced cancer, resulting in poor information and a lack of evidence. Generally, home-based SPC seems to have some positive effect on pain and dyspnea, but more high-quality studies are required.

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

Due to several methodological limitations, the evidence offered in these studies ranged from low to high. The evidence in this field of study in general is still nascent, but there is growing support for the utilization of SPC to improve the quality of life of adult patients with advanced cancer. The evidence that SPC reduces physical and psychological symptoms is moderate, while the evidence that it prolongs survival is low.

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.

Approximately two thirds of inpatients reported pain and one third had breakthrough pain. A substantial number of patients with pain were left untreated. Opioid-treated patients reported highest pain intensity and number of breakthrough episodes; however, analgesic medication seemed to be underused. Measures to improve pain assessment and management are highly required.

Patients in the wards of haematology and oncology had pronounced symptomatology and low quality of life. A more systematic focus on the amelioration of problems with functioning and symptoms among inpatients with malignant diseases is warranted.