A randomised trial of a psychosocial intervention for cancer patients integrated into routine care: The PROMPT study (promoting optimal outcomes in mood through tailored psychosocial therapies)

Background Despite evidence that up to 35% of patients with cancer experience significant distress, access to effective psychosocial care is limited by lack of systematic approaches to assessment, a paucity of psychosocial services, and patient reluctance to accept treatment either because of perceived stigma or difficulties with access to specialist psycho-oncology services due to isolation or disease burden. This paper presents an overview of a randomised study to evaluate the effectiveness of a brief tailored psychosocial Intervention delivered by health professionals in cancer care who undergo focused training and participate in clinical supervision. Methods/design Health professionals from the disciplines of nursing, occupational therapy, speech pathology, dietetics, physiotherapy or radiation therapy will participate in training to deliver the psychosocial Intervention focusing on core concepts of supportive-expressive, cognitive and dignity-conserving care. Health professional training will consist of completion of a self-directed manual and participation in a skills development session. Participating health professionals will be supported through structured clinical supervision whilst delivering the Intervention. In the stepped wedge design each of the 5 participating clinical sites will be allocated in random order from Control condition to Training then delivery of the Intervention. A total of 600 patients will be recruited across all sites. Based on level of distress or risk factors eligible patients will receive up to 4 sessions, each of up to 30 minutes in length, delivered face-to-face or by telephone. Participants will be assessed at baseline and 10-week follow-up. Patient outcome measures include anxiety and depression, quality of life, unmet psychological and supportive care needs. Health professional measures include psychological morbidity, stress and burnout. Process evaluation will be conducted to assess perceptions of participation in the study and the factors that may promote translation of learning into practice. Discussion This study will provide important information about the effectiveness of a brief tailored psychological Intervention for patients with cancer and the potential to prevent development of significant distress in patients considered at risk. It will yield data about the feasibility of this model of care in routine clinical practice and identify enablers and barriers to its systematic implementation in cancer settings.

A randomised, feasibility trial of a tele-health intervention for Acute Coronary Syndrome patients with depression ('MoodCare')

Background Coronary heart disease (CHD) and depression are leading causes of disease burden globally and the two often co-exist. Depression is common after Myocardial Infarction (MI) and it has been estimated that 15-35% of patients experience depressive symptoms. Co-morbid depression can impair health related quality of life (HRQOL), decrease medication adherence and appropriate utilisation of health services, lead to increased morbidity and suicide risk, and is associated with poorer CHD risk factor profiles and reduced survival. We aim to determine the feasibility of conducting a randomised, multi-centre trial designed to compare a tele-health program (MoodCare) for depression and CHD secondary prevention, with Usual Care (UC). Methods Over 1600 patients admitted after index admission for Acute Coronary Syndrome (ACS) are being screened for depression at six metropolitan hospitals in the Australian states of Victoria and Queensland. Consenting participants are then contacted at two weeks post-discharge for baseline assessment. One hundred eligible participants are to be randomised to an intervention or a usual medical care control group (50 per group). The intervention consists of up to 10 × 30-40 minute structured telephone sessions, delivered by registered psychologists, commencing within two weeks of baseline screening. The intervention focuses on depression management, lifestyle factors (physical activity, healthy eating, smoking cessation, alcohol intake), medication adherence and managing co-morbidities. Data collection occurs at baseline (Time 1), 6 months (post-intervention) (Time 2), 12 months (Time 3) and 24 months follow-up for longer term effects (Time 4). We are comparing depression (Cardiac Depression Scale [CDS]) and HRQOL (Short Form-12 [SF-12]) scores between treatment and UC groups, assessing the feasibility of the program through patient acceptability and exploring long term maintenance effects. A cost-effectiveness analysis of the costs and outcomes for patients in the intervention and control groups is being conducted from the perspective of health care costs to the government. Discussion This manuscript presents the protocol for a randomised, multi-centre trial to evaluate the feasibility of a tele-based depression management and CHD secondary prevention program for ACS patients. The results of this trial will provide valuable new information about potential psychological and wellbeing benefits, cost-effectiveness and acceptability of an innovative tele-based depression management and secondary prevention program for CHD patients experiencing depression.

Acceptability of the distress thermometer and problem list to community-based telephone cancer helpline operators, and to cancer patients and carers

Background Cancer can be a distressing experience for cancer patients and carers, impacting on psychological, social, physical and spiritual functioning. However, health professionals often fail to detect distress in their patients due to time constraints and a lack of experience. Also, with the focus on the patient, carer needs are often overlooked. This study investigated the acceptability of brief distress screening with the Distress Thermometer (DT) and Problem List (PL) to operators of a community-based telephone helpline, as well as to cancer patients and carers calling the service. Methods Operators (n = 18) monitored usage of the DT and PL with callers (cancer patients/carers, >18 years, and English-speaking) from September-December 2006 (n = 666). The DT is a single item, 11-point scale to rate level of distress. The associated PL identifies the cause of distress. Results The DT and PL were used on 90% of eligible callers, most providing valid responses. Benefits included having an objective, structured and consistent means for distress screening and triage to supportive care services. Reported challenges included apparent inappropriateness of the tools due to the nature of the call or level of caller distress, the DT numeric scale, and the level of operator training. Conclusions We observed positive outcomes to using the DT and PL, although operators reported some challenges. Overcoming these challenges may improve distress screening particularly by less experienced clinicians, and further development of the PL items and DT scale may assist with administration. The DT and PL allow clinicians to direct/prioritise interventions or referrals, although ongoing training and support is critical in distress screening.

A double-blind randomised controlled trial of a natural oil-based emulsion containing allantoin versus aqueous cream for managing radiation-induced skin reactions in patients with cancer

Background: Radiation-induced skin reaction (RISR) is one of the most common and distressing side effects of radiotherapy in patients with cancer. It is featured with swelling, redness, itching, pain, breaks in skin, discomfort, and a burning sensation. There is a lack of convincing evidence supporting any single practice in the prevention or management of RISR. Methods/Designs: This double-blinded randomised controlled trial aims to investigate the effects of a natural oil-based emulsion containing allantoin (as known as Moogoo Udder Cream®) versus aqueous cream in reducing RISR, improving pain, itching and quality of life in this patient group. One group will receive Moogoo Udder Cream®. Another group will receive aqueous cream. Outcome measures will be collected using patient self-administered questionnaire, interviewer administered questionnaire and clinician assessment at commencement of radiotherapy, weekly during radiotherapy, and four weeks after the completion of radiotherapy. Discussion: Despite advances of radiologic advances and supportive care, RISR are still not well managed. There is a lack of efficacious interventions in managing RISR. While anecdotal evidence suggests that Moogoo Udder Cream® may be effective in managing RISR, research is needed to substantiate this claim. This paper presents the design of a double blind randomised controlled trial that will evaluate the effects of Moogoo Udder Cream® versus aqueous cream for managing in RISR in patients with cancer. Trial registration: ACTRN 12612000568819

Everyone's problem but nobody's job : staff perceptions and explanations for poor nutritional intake in older medical patients

Aim: Up to 60% of older medical patients are malnourished with further decline during hospital stay. There is limited evidence for effective nutrition intervention. Staff focus groups were conducted to improve understanding of potential contextual and cultural barriers to feeding older adults in hospital. Methods: Three focus groups involved 22 staff working on the acute medical wards of a large tertiary teaching hospital. Staff disciplines were nursing, dietetics, speech pathology, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, pharmacy. A semistructured topic guide was used by the same facilitator to prompt discussions on hospital nutrition care including barriers. Focus groups were tape-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically. Results: All staff recognised malnutrition to be an important problem in older patients during hospital stay and identified patient-level barriers to nutrition care such as non-compliance to feeding plans and hospital-level barriers including nursing staff shortages. Differences between disciplines revealed a lack of a coordinated approach, including poor knowledge of nutrition care processes, poor interdisciplinary communication, and a lack of a sense of shared responsibility/coordinated approach to nutrition care. All staff talked about competing activities at meal times and felt disempowered to prioritise nutrition in the acute medical setting. Staff agreed education and ‘extra hands’ would address most barriers but did not consider organisational change. Conclusions: Redesigning the model of care to reprioritise meal-time activities and redefine multidisciplinary roles and responsibilities would support coordinated nutrition care. However, effectiveness may also depend on hospitalwide leadership and support to empower staff and increase accountability within a team-led approach.