30
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Development of the Serious Illness Care Program: a randomised controlled trial of a palliative care communication intervention

      protocol

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Introduction

          Ensuring that patients receive care that is consistent with their goals and values is a critical component of high-quality care. This article describes the protocol for a cluster randomised controlled trial of a multicomponent, structured communication intervention.

          Methods and analysis

          Patients with advanced, incurable cancer and life expectancy of <12 months will participate together with their surrogate. Clinicians are enrolled and randomised either to usual care or the intervention. The Serious Illness Care Program is a multicomponent, structured communication intervention designed to identify patients, train clinicians to use a structured guide for advanced care planning discussion with patients, ‘trigger’ clinicians to have conversations, prepare patients and families for the conversation, and document outcomes of the discussion in a structured format in the electronic medical record. Clinician satisfaction with the intervention, confidence and attitudes will be assessed before and after the intervention. Self-report data will be collected from patients and surrogates approximately every 2 months up to 2 years or until the patient's death; patient medical records will be examined at the close of the study. Analyses will examine the impact of the intervention on the patient receipt of goal-concordant care, and peacefulness at the end of life. Secondary outcomes include patient anxiety, depression, quality of life, therapeutic alliance, quality of communication, and quality of dying and death. Key process measures include frequency, timing and quality of documented conversations.

          Ethics and dissemination

          This study was approved by the Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Institutional Review Board. Results will be reported in peer-reviewed publications and conference presentations.

          Trial registration number

          Protocol identifier NCT01786811; Pre-results.

          Related collections

          Most cited references34

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Validity of the Brief Patient Health Questionnaire Mood Scale (PHQ-9) in the general population.

          The aim of this study was to assess the validity of the Patient Health Questionnaire depression module (PHQ-9). It has been subject to studies in medical settings, but its validity as a screening for depression in the general population is unknown. A representative population sample (2,066 subjects, 14-93 years) filled in the PHQ-9 for diagnosis [major depressive disorder, other depressive disorder, depression screen-positive (DS+) and depression screen-negative (DS-)] and other measures for distress (GHQ-12), depression (Brief-BDI) and subjective health perception (EuroQOL; SF-36). A prevalence rate of 9.2% of a current PHQ depressive disorder (major depression 3.8%, subthreshold other depressive disorder 5.4%) was identified. The two depression groups had higher Brief-BDI and GHQ-12 scores, and reported lower health status (EuroQOL) and health-related quality of life (SF-36) than did the DS- group (P's < .001). Strong associations between PHQ-9 depression severity and convergent variables were found (with BDI r = .73, with GHQ-12 r = .59). The results support the construct validity of the PHQ depression scale, which seems to be a useful tool to recognize not only major depression but also subthreshold depressive disorder in the general population.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            End-of-life discussions, goal attainment, and distress at the end of life: predictors and outcomes of receipt of care consistent with preferences.

            Physicians have an ethical obligation to honor patients' values for care, including at the end of life (EOL). We sought to evaluate factors that help patients to receive care consistent with their preferences. This was a longitudinal multi-institutional cohort study. We measured baseline preferences for life-extending versus symptom-directed care and actual EOL care received in 325 patients with advanced cancer. We also measured associated sociodemographic, health, and communication characteristics, including EOL discussions between patients and physicians. Preferences were assessed a median of 125 days before death. Overall, 68% of patients (220 of 325 patients) received EOL care consistent with baseline preferences. The proportion was slightly higher among patients who recognized they were terminally ill (74%, 90 of 121 patients; P = .05). Patients who recognized their terminal illness were more likely to prefer symptom-directed care (83%, 100 of 121 patients; v 66%, 127 of 191 patients; P = .003). However, some patients who were aware they were terminally ill wished to receive life-extending care (17%, 21 of 121 patients). Patients who reported having discussed their wishes for EOL care with a physician (39%, 125 of 322 patients) were more likely to receive care that was consistent with their preferences, both in the full sample (odds ratio [OR] = 2.26; P < .0001) and among patients who were aware they were terminally ill (OR = 3.94; P = .0005). Among patients who received no life-extending measures, physical distress was lower (mean score, 3.1 v 4.1; P = .03) among patients for whom such care was consistent with preferences. Patients with cancer are more likely to receive EOL care that is consistent with their preferences when they have had the opportunity to discuss their wishes for EOL care with a physician.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Psychometric comparison of PHQ-9 and HADS for measuring depression severity in primary care.

              The 2004 National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) guidelines highlight the importance of assessing severity of depression in primary care. To assess the psychometric properties of the Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) and the depression subscale of the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS-D) for measuring depression severity in primary care. Psychometric assessment. Thirty-two general practices in Grampian, Scotland. Consecutive patients referred to a primary care mental health worker completed the PHQ-9 and HADS at baseline (n = 1063) and at the end of treatment (n = 544). Data were analysed to assess reliability, robustness of factor structure, convergent/discriminant validity, convergence of severity banding, and responsiveness to change. Both scales demonstrated high internal consistency at baseline and end of treatment (PHQ-9 alpha = 0.83 and 0.92; HADS-D alpha = 0.84 and 0.89). One factor emerged each for the PHQ-9 (explaining 42% of variance) and HADS-D (explaining 52% of variance). Both scales converged more with each other than with the HADS anxiety (HADS-A) subscale at baseline (P<0.001) and at end of treatment (P = 0.01). Responsiveness to change was similar: effect size for PHQ-9 = 0.99 and for the HADS-D = 1. The HADS-D and PHQ-9 differed significantly in categorising severity of depression, with the PHQ-9 categorising a greater proportion of patients with moderate/severe depression (P<0.001). The HADS-D and PHQ-9 demonstrated reliability, convergent/discriminant validity, and responsiveness to change. However, they differed considerably in how they catergorised severity. Given that treatment decisions are made on the basis of severity, further work is needed to assess the validity of the scales' severity cut-off bands.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Open
                bmjopen
                bmjopen
                BMJ Open
                BMJ Publishing Group (BMA House, Tavistock Square, London, WC1H 9JR )
                2044-6055
                2015
                6 October 2015
                : 5
                : 10
                : e009032
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Harvard Medical School , Boston, Massachusetts, USA
                [2 ]Department of Psychosocial Oncology and Palliative Care, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute , Boston, Massachusetts, USA
                [3 ]Ariadne Labs at Brigham and Women's Hospital and the Harvard T. H. Chan School of Public Health , Boston, Massachusetts, USA
                [4 ]Harvard Medical School Center for Palliative Care , Boston, Massachusetts, USA
                [5 ]Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine , Baltimore, Maryland, USA
                [6 ]University of California San Francisco , San Francisco, California, USA
                Author notes
                [Correspondence to ] Dr Rachelle Bernacki; rbernacki@ 123456partners.org
                Article
                bmjopen-2015-009032
                10.1136/bmjopen-2015-009032
                4606432
                26443662
                790d36b9-514b-4eae-ac8e-dbb8ea6ac551
                Published by the BMJ Publishing Group Limited. For permission to use (where not already granted under a licence) please go to http://group.bmj.com/group/rights-licensing/permissions

                This is an Open Access article distributed in accordance with the Creative Commons Attribution Non Commercial (CC BY-NC 4.0) license, which permits others to distribute, remix, adapt, build upon this work non-commercially, and license their derivative works on different terms, provided the original work is properly cited and the use is non-commercial. See: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/4.0/

                History
                : 9 June 2015
                : 3 September 2015
                : 14 September 2015
                Categories
                Palliative Care
                Protocol
                1506
                1720
                1717

                Medicine
                Medicine

                Comments

                Comment on this article