Information interventions for orienting patients and their carers to cancer care facilities (Protocol)

To assess the effects of information interventions which orient patients and their carers/family to a cancer care facility and the services available in the facility.

Information interventions for orienting patients and their carers to cancer care facilities

Background: Cancer patients experience distress and anxiety related to their diagnosis, treatment and the unfamiliar cancer centre. Strategies with the aim of orienting patients to a cancer care facility may improve patient outcomes. Although meeting patients' information needs at different stages is important, there is little agreement about the type of information and the timing for information to be given. Orientation interventions aim to address information needs at the start of a person's experience with a cancer care facility. The extent of any benefit of these interventions is unknown. Objectives: To assess the effects of information interventions which orient patients and their carers/family to a cancer care facility, and to the services available in the facility. Search Methods: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (The Cochrane Library 2011, Issue 2); MEDLINE (OvidSP) (1966 to Jun 2011), EMBASE (Ovid SP) (1966 to Jun 2011), CINAHL (EBSCO) (1982 to Jun 2011), PsycINFO (OvidSP) (1966 to Jun 2011), review articles and reference lists of relevant articles. We contacted principal investigators and experts in the field. Selection Criteria: Randomised controlled trials (RCTs), cluster RCTs and quasi-RCTs evaluating the effects of information interventions that orient patients and their carers/family to a cancer care facility. Data collection and analysis: Results of searches were reviewed against the pre-determined criteria for inclusion by two review authors. The primary outcomes were knowledge and understanding; health status and wellbeing, evaluation of care, and harms. Secondary outcomes were communication, skills acquisition, behavioural outcomes, service delivery, and health professional outcomes. We pooled results of RCTs using mean differences (MD) and 95% confidence intervals (CI). Main results: We included four RCTs involving 610 participants. All four trials aimed to investigate the effects of orientation programs for cancer patients to a cancer facility. There was high risk of bias across studies. Findings from two of the RCTs demonstrated significant benefits of the orientation intervention in relation to levels of distress (mean difference (MD) -8.96 (95% confidence interval (CI) -11.79 to -6.13), but non-significant benefits in relation to state anxiety levels (MD -9.77 (95% CI -24.96 to 5.41). Other outcomes for participants were generally positive (e.g. more knowledgeable about the cancer centre and cancer therapy, better coping abilities). No harms or adverse effects were measured or reported by any of the included studies. There were insufficient data on the other outcomes of interest. Authors conclusion: This review has demonstrated the feasibility and some potential benefits of orientation interventions. There was a low level of evidence suggesting that orientation interventions can reduce distress in patients. However, most of the other outcomes remain inconclusive (patient knowledge recall/ satisfaction). The majority of studies were subject to high risk of bias, and were likely to be insufficiently powered. Further well conducted and powered RCTs are required to provide evidence for determining the most appropriate intensity, nature, mode and resources for such interventions. Patient and carer-focused outcomes should be included.

The relationship between clinical outcomes and quality of life for residents of aged care facilities

Objectives It is widely assumed improving care in residential facilities will improve quality of life (QoL), but little research has explored this relationship. The Clinical Care Indicators (CCI) Tool was developed to fill an existing gap in quality assessment within Australian residential aged care facilities and it was used to explore potential links between clinical outcomes and QoL. Design and Setting Clinical outcome and QoL data were collected within four residential facilities from the same aged care provider. Subjects Subjects were 82 residents of four facilities. Outcome Measures Clinical outcomes were measured using the CCI Tool and QoL data was obtained using the Australian WHOQOL‑100. Results Independent t‑test analyses were calculated to compare individual CCIs with each domain of the WHOQOL‑100, while Pearson’s product moment coefficients (r) were calculated between the total number of problem indicators and QoL scores. Significant results suggested poorer clinical outcomes adversely affected QoL. Social and spiritual QoL were particularly affected by clinical outcomes and poorer status in hydration, falls and depression were most strongly associated with lower QoL scores. Poorer clinical status as a whole was also significantly correlated with poorer QoL. Conclusions Hydration, falls and depression were most often associated with poorer resident QoL and as such appear to be key areas for clinical management in residential aged care. However, poor clinical outcomes overall also adversely affected QoL, which suggests maintaining optimum clinical status through high quality nursing care, would not only be important for resident health but also for enhancing general life quality.

Malnutrition and pressure ulcer risk in adults in Australian health care facilities

Aims To determine the effect of nutritional status on the presence and severity of pressure ulcers in statewide? public healthcare facilities, in Queensland, Australia. Research Methods A multicentre, cross sectional audit of nutritional status of a convenience sample of subjects was carried out as part of a large audit of pressure ulcers in a sample of state based public healthcare facilities in 2002 and 2003. Dietitians in 20 hospitals and six residential aged care facilities conducted single day nutritional status audits of 2208 acute and 839 aged care subjects using the Subjective Global Assessment. The effect of nutritional status on the presence, highest stage and number of pressure ulcers was determined by logistic regression in a model controlling for age, gender, medical specialty and facility location. The potential clustering effect of facility was accounted for in the model using an analysis of correlated data approach. Results Subjects with malnutrition had an adjusted odds risk of 2.6 (95% CI 1.8-3.5, p<0.001) of having a pressure ulcer in acute facilities and 2.0 (95% CI 1.5-2.7, p<0.001) for residential aged care facilities. There was also increased odds risk of having a pressure ulcer, having a higher stage pressure ulcer and a higher number of pressure ulcers with increased severity of malnutrition. Conclusion Malnutrition was associated with at least twice the odds risk of having a pressure ulcer of in public healthcare facilities in Queensland. Action must be taken to identify, prevent and treat malnutrition, especially in patients at risk of pressure ulcer.

Development of a Systematic Approach to Assessing Quality within Australian Residential Aged Care Facilities: The Clinical Care Indicators Tool

Recent years have seen the introduction of formalised accreditation processes in both community and residential aged care, but these only partially address quality assessment within this sector. Residential aged care in Australia does not yet have a standardised system of resident assessment related to clinical, rather than administrative, outcomes. This paper describes the development of a quality assessment tool aimed at addressing this gap. Utilising previous research and the results of nominal groups with experts in the field, the 21-item Clinical Care Indicators (CCI) Tool for residential aged care was developed and trialled nationally. The CCI Tool was found to be simple to use and an effective means of collecting data on the state of resident health and care, with potential benefits for resident care planning and continuous quality improvement within facilities and organisations. The CCI Tool was further refined through a small intervention study to assess its utility as a quality improvement instrument and to investigate its relationship with resident quality of life. The current version covers 23 clinical indicators, takes about 30 minutes to complete and is viewed favourably by nursing staff who use it. Current work focuses on psychometric analysis and benchmarking, which should enable the CCI Tool to make a positive contribution to the measurement of quality in aged care in Australia.

Benchmarking clinical indicators of quality for Australian residential aged care facilities

To undertake exploratory benchmarking of a set of clinical indicators of quality care in residential care in Australia, data were collected from 107 residents within four medium-sized facilities (40–80 beds) in Brisbane, Australia. The proportion of residents in each sample facility with a particular clinical problem was compared with US Minimum Data Set quality indicator thresholds. Results demonstrated variability within and between clinical indicators, suggesting breadth of assessment using various clinical indicators of quality is an important factor when monitoring quality of care. More comprehensive and objective measures of quality of care would be of great assistance in determining and monitoring the effectiveness of residential aged care provision in Australia, particularly as demands for accountability by consumers and their families increase. What is known about the topic? The key to quality improvement is effective quality assessment, and one means of evaluating quality of care is through clinical outcomes. The Minimum Data Set quality indicators have been credited with improving quality in United States nursing homes. What does this paper add? The Clinical Care Indicators Tool was used to collect data on clinical outcomes, enabling comparison of data from a small Australian sample with American quality benchmarks to illustrate the utility of providing guidelines for interpretation. What are the implications for practitioners? Collecting and comparing clinical outcome data would enable practitioners to better understand the quality of care being provided and whether practices required review. The Clinical Care Indicator Tool could provide a comprehensive and systematic means of doing this, thus filling a gap in quality monitoring within Australian residential aged care.

Facilitating needs based cancer care for people with a chronic disease : evaluation of an intervention using a multi-centre interrupted time series design

Background: Palliative care should be provided according to the individual needs of the patient, caregiver and family, so that the type and level of care provided, as well as the setting in which it is delivered, are dependent on the complexity and severity of individual needs, rather than prognosis or diagnosis. This paper presents a study designed to assess the feasibility and efficacy of an intervention to assist in the allocation of palliative care resources according to need, within the context of a population of people with advanced cancer. ---------- Methods/design: People with advanced cancer and their caregivers completed bi-monthly telephone interviews over a period of up to 18 months to assess unmet needs, anxiety and depression, quality of life, satisfaction with care and service utilisation. The intervention, introduced after at least two baseline phone interviews, involved a) training medical, nursing and allied health professionals at each recruitment site on the use of the Palliative Care Needs Assessment Guidelines and the Needs Assessment Tool: Progressive Disease - Cancer (NAT: PD-C); b) health professionals completing the NAT: PD-C with participating patients approximately monthly for the rest of the study period. Changes in outcomes will be compared pre-and post-intervention.---------- Discussion: The study will determine whether the routine, systematic and regular use of the Guidelines and NAT: PD-C in a range of clinical settings is a feasible and effective strategy for facilitating the timely provision of needs based care.

Clinical indicators of quality for Australian residential aged care facilities : establishing reliability, validity, and quality thresholds

Background: In response to the need for more comprehensive quality assessment within Australian residential aged care facilities, the Clinical Care Indicator (CCI) Tool was developed to collect outcome data as a means of making inferences about quality. A national trial of its effectiveness and a Brisbane-based trial of its use within the quality improvement context determined the CCI Tool represented a potentially valuable addition to the Australian aged care system. This document describes the next phase in the CCI Tool.s development; the aims of which were to establish validity and reliability of the CCI Tool, and to develop quality indicator thresholds (benchmarks) for use in Australia. The CCI Tool is now known as the ResCareQA (Residential Care Quality Assessment). Methods: The study aims were achieved through a combination of quantitative data analysis, and expert panel consultations using modified Delphi process. The expert panel consisted of experienced aged care clinicians, managers, and academics; they were initially consulted to determine face and content validity of the ResCareQA, and later to develop thresholds of quality. To analyse its psychometric properties, ResCareQA forms were completed for all residents (N=498) of nine aged care facilities throughout Queensland. Kappa statistics were used to assess inter-rater and test-retest reliability, and Cronbach.s alpha coefficient calculated to determine internal consistency. For concurrent validity, equivalent items on the ResCareQA and the Resident Classification Scales (RCS) were compared using Spearman.s rank order correlations, while discriminative validity was assessed using known-groups technique, comparing ResCareQA results between groups with differing care needs, as well as between male and female residents. Rank-ordered facility results for each clinical care indicator (CCI) were circulated to the panel; upper and lower thresholds for each CCI were nominated by panel members and refined through a Delphi process. These thresholds indicate excellent care at one extreme and questionable care at the other. Results: Minor modifications were made to the assessment, and it was renamed the ResCareQA. Agreement on its content was reached after two Delphi rounds; the final version contains 24 questions across four domains, enabling generation of 36 CCIs. Both test-retest and inter-rater reliability were sound with median kappa values of 0.74 (test-retest) and 0.91 (inter-rater); internal consistency was not as strong, with a Chronbach.s alpha of 0.46. Because the ResCareQA does not provide a single combined score, comparisons for concurrent validity were made with the RCS on an item by item basis, with most resultant correlations being quite low. Discriminative validity analyses, however, revealed highly significant differences in total number of CCIs between high care and low care groups (t199=10.77, p=0.000), while the differences between male and female residents were not significant (t414=0.56, p=0.58). Clinical outcomes varied both within and between facilities; agreed upper and lower thresholds were finalised after three Delphi rounds. Conclusions: The ResCareQA provides a comprehensive, easily administered means of monitoring quality in residential aged care facilities that can be reliably used on multiple occasions. The relatively modest internal consistency score was likely due to the multi-factorial nature of quality, and the absence of an aggregate result for the assessment. Measurement of concurrent validity proved difficult in the absence of a gold standard, but the sound discriminative validity results suggest that the ResCareQA has acceptable validity and could be confidently used as an indication of care quality within Australian residential aged care facilities. The thresholds, while preliminary due to small sample size, enable users to make judgements about quality within and between facilities. Thus it is recommended the ResCareQA be adopted for wider use.

Utility of routine data sources for feedback on the quality of cancer care: an assessment based on clinical practice guidelines

Background Not all cancer patients receive state-of-the-art care and providing regular feedback to clinicians might reduce this problem. The purpose of this study was to assess the utility of various data sources in providing feedback on the quality of cancer care. Methods Published clinical practice guidelines were used to obtain a list of processes-of-care of interest to clinicians. These were assigned to one of four data categories according to their availability and the marginal cost of using them for feedback. Results Only 8 (3%) of 243 processes-of-care could be measured using population-based registry or administrative inpatient data (lowest cost). A further 119 (49%) could be measured using a core clinical registry, which contains information on important prognostic factors (e.g., clinical stage, physiological reserve, hormone-receptor status). Another 88 (36%) required an expanded clinical registry or medical record review; mainly because they concerned long-term management of disease progression (recurrences and metastases) and 28 (11.5%) required patient interview or audio-taping of consultations because they involved information sharing between clinician and patient. Conclusion The advantages of population-based cancer registries and administrative inpatient data are wide coverage and low cost. The disadvantage is that they currently contain information on only a few processes-of-care. In most jurisdictions, clinical cancer registries, which can be used to report on many more processes-of-care, do not cover smaller hospitals. If we are to provide feedback about all patients, not just those in larger academic hospitals with the most developed data systems, then we need to develop sustainable population-based data systems that capture information on prognostic factors at the time of initial diagnosis and information on management of disease progression.

Positive impacts of environmental characteristics on health and wellbeing in health-care facilities : a review

Well-designed indoor environments can support people’s health and welfare. In this literature review, we identify the environmental features that affect human health and wellbeing. Environmental characteristics found to influence health outcomes and/or wellbeing included: environmental safety; indoor air quality (e.g. odour and temperature); sound and noise; premises and interior design (e.g. construction materials, viewing nature and experiencing nature, windows versus no windows, light, colours, unit layout and placement of the furniture, the type of room, possibilities to control environmental elements, environmental complexity and sensory simulations, cleanliness, ergonomics and accessibility, ‛‛wayfinding’’); art, and music, among others. Indoor environments that incorporate healing elements can, for instance, reduce anxiety, lower blood pressure, lessen pain and shorten hospital stays.

Can we deliver both population-based and personalized approaches to cancer care?

Responding to the individual needs of the person affected by cancer is a fundamental tenet of nursing care. The evidence base to enable highly personalized approaches to the way we provide care has grown enormously in recent years. Today, we have a much better understanding of the mechanisms underpinning health needs of people with cancer, as well as the wide range of environmental, sociocultural, psychological, and biological influences on these needs. This growing evidence base enables us to better target and tailor interventions in increasingly sophisticated ways.