Improving supportive care for patients with Thoracic Malignancies - A randomized controlled trial

Manali I Patel, Lakedia Banks, Millie Das, Manali I Patel, Lakedia Banks, Millie Das

Abstract

Veterans have higher lung cancer incidence and mortality rates than civilians. Frequently, Veterans with lung cancer suffer from undertreated symptoms due to complex comorbidities, limited social support, and reluctance in discussing symptoms with their oncologists. Evidence supports proactive symptom screening among civilians with cancer; however, no studies to date have evaluated whether Veteran volunteer-led proactive symptom screening is feasible and effective among Veterans with lung cancer. The "Improving Supportive Care for Patients with Thoracic Malignancies" study was co-developed by a pre-established Veteran and Family Advisory Board. Veterans with lung cancer are randomized in a 1:1 allocation to either a 9-month intervention combined with usual oncology care (intervention group) or usual oncology care alone (control group). A Veteran volunteer is assigned to all Veterans in the intervention group and conducts weekly symptom assessments using validated symptom surveys and reviews all symptom scores with an oncology nurse practitioner. The primary outcome is to evaluate whether the intervention improves documentation of symptoms at 6 months post-enrollment among Veterans in the intervention group as compared with the control group. Secondary outcomes include changes in patient-reported outcomes (i.e., symptom burden, patient activation, patient satisfaction with decision, health-related quality of life) and differences in acute care use (i.e., emergency department visits, hospitalizations) from baseline (time of enrollment in the study) to 3-, 6-, and 9-months post enrollment. This study addresses a significant concern expressed by Veterans and their caregivers. Findings can advance our understanding of how to improve symptom-burden among Veterans with lung cancer. ClinicalTrials.gov Registration #NCT03216109.

Keywords: Cancer care; Community health worker; Lung cancer; Supportive cancer care; Symptom management; Veteran health.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper.

Figures

Fig. 1
Fig. 1
Study design.

References

    1. Harris R.E., Hebert J.R., Wynder E.L. Cancer risk in male veterans utilizing the Veterans Administration medical system. Cancer. 1989;64(5):1160–1168.
    1. Zullig L.L., Sims K.J., McNeil R., et al. Cancer incidence among patients of the U.S. Veterans Affairs health care system: 2010 update. Mil. Med. 2017;182(7):e1883–e1891.
    1. McGuire S., Nord M., Coleman-Jensen A., Andrews M., Carlson S. Household food security in the United States, 2009. EER-108, U.S. Dept. Of agriculture, econ. Res. Serv. November 2010. Adv. Nutr. 2011;2(2):153–154.
    1. Parikh D.A., Ragavan M., Dutta R., et al. Financial toxicity of cancer care: an analysis of financial burden in three distinct health care systems. JCO Oncol. Pract. 2021;17(10):e1450–e1459.
    1. Improving the Quality of Mental Health Care for Veterans: Lessons from RAND Research. RAND Corporation; Santa Monica, CA: 2019.
    1. Kondo K., Low A., Everson T., et al. Health Disparities in veterans: a map of the evidence. Med. Care. 2017;55(Suppl 9 Suppl 2):S9–s15.
    1. Laudon Thomas M. Veterans with cancer: providing care in the community. Clin. J. Oncol. Nurs. 2020;24(3):331–334.
    1. Agha Z., Lofgren R.P., VanRuiswyk J.V., Layde P.M. Are patients at Veterans Affairs medical centers sicker? A comparative analysis of health status and medical resource use. Arch. Intern. Med. 2000;160(21):3252–3257.
    1. Selim A.J., Berlowitz D.R., Fincke G., et al. The health status of elderly veteran enrollees in the Veterans Health Administration. J. Am. Geriatr. Soc. 2004;52(8):1271–1276.
    1. Reinke L.F., Feemster L.C., Backhus L.M., Gylys-Colwell I., Au D.H. Assessment and management of symptoms for outpatients newly diagnosed with lung cancer. Am. J. Hosp. Palliat. Care. 2016;33(2):178–183.
    1. Patel M.I., Periyakoil V.S., Blayney D.W., et al. Redesigning cancer care delivery: views from patients and caregivers. J. Oncol. Pract. 2017;13(4):e291–e302.
    1. Zullig L.L., Goldstein K.M., Bosworth H.B. Changes in the delivery of veterans Affairs cancer care: ensuring delivery of coordinated, quality cancer care in a time of uncertainty. J. Oncol. Prac. 2017;13(11):709–711.
    1. Patel M.I., Sundaram V., Desai M., et al. Effect of a lay health worker intervention on goals-of-care documentation and on health care use, costs, and satisfaction among patients with cancer: a randomized clinical trial. JAMA Oncol. 2018;4(10):1359–1366.
    1. Patel M.I., Moore D., Coker T.R. End-of-Life cancer care redesign: patient and caregiver experiences in a lay health worker-led intervention. Am. J. Hosp. Palliat. Care. 2019;36(12):1081–1088.
    1. Carevive Inc.
    1. Harris P.A., Taylor R., Thielke R., Payne J., Gonzalez N., Conde J.G. Research electronic data capture (REDCap)—a metadata-driven methodology and workflow process for providing translational research informatics support. J. Biomed. Inf. 2009;42(2):377–381.
    1. Bruera E., Kuehn N., Miller M.J., Selmser P., Macmillan K. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS): a simple method for the assessment of palliative care patients. J. Palliat. Care. 1991;7(2):6–9.
    1. Hibbard J.H., Stockard J., Mahoney E.R., Tusler M. Development of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM): conceptualizing and measuring activation in patients and consumers. Health Serv. Res. 2004;39(4 Pt 1):1005–1026.
    1. Hibbard J.H., Mahoney E.R., Stockard J., Tusler M. Development and testing of a short form of the patient activation measure. Health Serv. Res. 2005;40(6 Pt 1):1918–1930.
    1. Holmes-Rovner M., Kroll J., Schmitt N., et al. Patient satisfaction with health care decisions: the satisfaction with decision scale. Med. Decis. Making. 1996;16(1):58–64.
    1. Cella D.F., Bonomi A.E., Lloyd S.R., Tulsky D.S., Kaplan E., Bonomi P. Reliability and validity of the functional assessment of cancer therapy-lung (FACT-L) quality of life instrument. Lung Cancer. 1995;12(3):199–220.
    1. Donabedian A. The quality of medical care. Science. 1978;200(4344):856–864.
    1. Patel M.I., Periyakoil V.S., Moore D., Nevedal A., Coker T.R. Delivering end-of-life cancer care: perspectives of providers. Am. J. Hosp. Palliat. Care. 2018;35(3):497–504.
    1. Patel M.I., Moore D., Bhattacharya J., Milstein A., Coker T.R. Perspectives of health care payer organizations on cancer care delivery redesign: a national study. J. Oncol. Pract. 2019;15(1):e46–e55.
    1. Patel M.I., Ramirez D., Agajanian R., Agajanian H., Coker T. Association of a lay health worker intervention with symptom burden, survival, health care use, and total costs among medicare enrollees with cancer. JAMA Netw. Open. 2020;3(3) e201023.
    1. Network N.C.C. Treatment by cancer Type 2019. . Published.
    1. Patel M.I., Ramirez D., Agajanian R., Agajanian H., Bhattacharya J., Bundorf K.M. Lay health worker-led cancer symptom screening intervention and the effect on patient-reported satisfaction, health status, health care use, and total costs: results from a tri-Part Collaboration. JCO Oncol. Pract. 2020;16(1):e19–e28.

Source: PubMed

Sponsors et collaborateurs

Les conditions médicales

Interventions en matière de drogue

3
S'abonner