A randomised controlled trial of hospital-based case management to improve colorectal cancer patients' health-related quality of life and evaluations of care

Christian Nielsen Wulff, Peter Vedsted, Jens Søndergaard, Christian Nielsen Wulff, Peter Vedsted, Jens Søndergaard

Abstract

Objective: To analyse the effectiveness of hospital-based case management (CM) in terms of patient-reported outcomes.

Design: Randomised controlled trial allocating participants 1 : 1 to either a CM intervention or a control group. Allocation status was evident to participants and case managers, but blinded to researchers.

Setting: Patients were recruited at a Danish surgical department where the case managers were situated.

Participants: Colorectal cancer patients who were to undergo further investigation or treatment. Exclusion criteria were participation in another study, poor Danish language skills or apparent cognitive impairment. 140 participants were randomised to each group. Recruitment period was 11 March 2009 to 29 December 2010.

Interventions: Control group patients had usual care. Intervention group patients had usual care supplemented by hospital-based CM started at first visit to the out-patient clinic (before treatment start) and ended 4 weeks after completed cancer treatment. CM was conducted by nurse case managers who undertook care pathway supervision, information dissemination to health professionals and outreaching patient support.

Outcome measures: Patient-reported global quality of life measured with the EORTC QLQ-C30 and eight ad hoc, piloted patient evaluation items assessed at eight, 30 and 52 weeks after randomisation.

Results: The two groups were comparable as to questionnaire response rates and completed scales/items. There were no statistically significant group differences on any of the health-related quality of life subscales at eight, 30 or 52 weeks. In patient evaluations, all point estimates favoured CM at week 8 and 30; at week 52, 6 of 7 estimates favoured CM.

Conclusions: We found no evidence that CM influenced colorectal cancer patients' health-related quality of life. Patients allocated to CM evaluated their care more positively than patients receiving usual care.

Trial registration: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT00845247.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Overview of the interventions.
Figure 2
Figure 2
Trial profile
Figure 3
Figure 3
Average EORTC QLQ-C30 scale scores by group and by length of follow-up.

References

    1. Storm HH, Kejs AM, Engholm G, et al. Trends in the overall survival of cancer patients diagnosed 1964–2003 in the Nordic countries followed up to the end of 2006: the importance of case-mix. Acta Oncol 2010;49:713–24
    1. Henoch I, Danielson E. Existential concerns among patients with cancer and interventions to meet them: an integrative literature review. Psychooncology 2009;18:225–36
    1. Bottomley A. The cancer patient and quality of life. Oncologist 2002;7:120–5
    1. Fincham L, Copp G, Caldwell K, et al. Supportive care: experiences of cancer patients. Eur J Oncol Nurs 2005;9:258–68
    1. Preston C, Cheater F, Baker R, et al. Left in limbo: patients’ views on care across the primary/secondary interface. Qual Health Care 1999;8:16–21
    1. Kripalani S, LeFevre F, Phillips CO, et al. Deficits in communication and information transfer between hospital-based and primary care physicians: implications for patient safety and continuity of care. JAMA 2007;297:831–41
    1. Haggerty JL, Reid RJ, Freeman GK, et al. Continuity of care: a multidisciplinary review. BMJ 2003;327:1219–21
    1. Yost KJ, Hahn EA, Zaslavsky AM, et al. Predictors of health-related quality of life in patients with colorectal cancer. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2008;6:66.
    1. Dunn J, Lynch B, Rinaldis M, et al. Dimensions of quality of life and psychosocial variables most salient to colorectal cancer patients. Psychooncology 2006;15:20–30
    1. Lee DT, Mackenzie AE, Dudley-Brown S, et al. Case management: a review of the definitions and practices. J Adv Nurs 1998;27:933–9
    1. Wulff CN, Thygesen M, Sondergaard J, et al. Case management used to optimize cancer care pathways: a systematic review. BMC Health Serv Res 2008;8:227.
    1. Andersen JS, Olivarius N de F, Krasnik A. The Danish National Health Service Register. Scand J Public Health 2011;39:34–7
    1. The Ministry of the Interior and Health The Danish Health Act No. 913 of 13 July 2010 (In Danish). (accessed 15 Jan 2012)
    1. Perera R, Heneghan C, Yudkin P. Graphical method for depicting randomised trials of complex interventions. BMJ 2007;334:127–9
    1. The National Board of Health Chronic disease management: a national strategy—disease management programmes and self-management support. Copenhagen: The National Board of Health, 2007
    1. Aaronson NK, Ahmedzai S, Bergman B, et al. The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer QLQ-C30: a quality-of-life instrument for use in international clinical trials in oncology. J Natl Cancer Inst 1993;85:365–76
    1. Bjordal K, de Graeff A, Fayers PM, et al. A 12 country field study of the EORTC QLQ-C30 (version 3.0) and the head and neck cancer specific module (EORTC QLQ-H&N35) in head and neck patients. EORTC Quality of Life Group. Eur J Cancer 2000;36:1796–807
    1. Fayers PM, Aaronson NK, Bjordal K, et al. The EORTC QLQ-C30 scoring manual. 3rd edn Brussels: The European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer, 2001
    1. Cocks K, King MT, Velikova G, et al. Evidence-based guidelines for determination of sample size and interpretation of the European organisation for the research and treatment of cancer quality of life questionnaire core 30. J Clin Oncol 2011;29:89–96
    1. Osoba D, Rodrigues G, Myles J, et al. Interpreting the significance of changes in health-related quality-of-life scores. J Clin Oncol 1998;16:139–44
    1. Treasure T, MacRae KD. Minimisation: the platinum standard for trials? Randomisation doesn't guarantee similarity of groups; minimisation does. BMJ 1998;317:362–3
    1. Wade A, Pan H, Eaton S, et al. An investigation of minimisation criteria. BMC Med Res Methodol 2006;6:11.
    1. Vickers AJ, Altman DG. Statistics notes: analysing controlled trials with baseline and follow up measurements. BMJ 2001;323:1123–4
    1. Klee M, Groenvold M, Machin D. Using data from studies of health-related quality of life to describe clinical issues examples from a longitudinal study of patients with advanced stages of cervical cancer. Qual Life Res 1999;8:733–42
    1. Barros AJ, Hirakata VN. Alternatives for logistic regression in cross-sectional studies: an empirical comparison of models that directly estimate the prevalence ratio. BMC Med Res Methodol 2003;3:21.
    1. Juni P, Egger M. Commentary: empirical evidence of attrition bias in clinical trials. Int J Epidemiol 2005;34:87–8
    1. Rothwell PM. Treating individuals 2. Subgroup analysis in randomised controlled trials: importance, indications, and interpretation. Lancet 2005;365:176–86
    1. The Ministry of the Interior and Health Act on a biomedical research ethics committee system and the processing of biomedical research projects. Copenhagen: The Ministry of the Interior and Health, 2011. (assessed 7 Jun 2012)
    1. Rothman KJ. Epidemiology: an introduction. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2002
    1. Ernstmann N, Neumann M, Ommen O, et al. Determinants and implications of cancer patients’ psychosocial needs. Support Care Cancer 2009;17:1417–23
    1. The Danish Cancer Society A cancer patient's world. An investigation of what Danish cancer patients need—results, evaluations and suggestions (In Danish) . Copenhagen: The Danish Cancer Society, 2006
    1. Moore S, Corner J, Haviland J, et al. Nurse led follow up and conventional medical follow up in management of patients with lung cancer: randomised trial. BMJ 2002;325:1145.
    1. Engelhardt JB, McClive-Reed KP, Toseland RW, et al. Effects of a program for coordinated care of advanced illness on patients, surrogates, and healthcare costs: a randomized trial. Am J Manag Care 2006;12:93–100
    1. Goodwin JS, Satish S, Anderson ET, et al. Effect of nurse case management on the treatment of older women with breast cancer. J Am Geriatr Soc 2003;51:1252–9
    1. Donabedian A. The quality of care. How can it be assessed? JAMA 1988;260:1743–8
    1. Mor V, Wool M, Guadagnoli E, et al. The impact of short-term case management on cancer patients’ concrete needs and quality of life. Adv Med Sociol 1995;6:269
    1. Ritz LJ, Nissen MJ, Swenson KK, et al. Effects of advanced nursing care on quality of life and cost outcomes of women diagnosed with breast cancer. Oncol Nurs Forum 2000;27:923–32
    1. Uwer L, Rotonda C, Guillemin F, et al. Responsiveness of EORTC QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR38 and FACT-C quality of life questionnaires in patients with colorectal cancer. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2011;9:70.

Source: PubMed

Sponzoři a spolupracovníci

Zdravotní podmínky

Drogové intervence

3
Předplatit