Literature DB >> 24139708

Liverpool Care Pathway for patients with cancer in hospital: a cluster randomised trial.

Massimo Costantini1, Vittoria Romoli2, Silvia Di Leo2, Monica Beccaro2, Laura Bono2, Paola Pilastri3, Guido Miccinesi4, Danila Valenti5, Carlo Peruselli6, Francesco Bulli4, Catia Franceschini7, Sergio Grubich6, Cinzia Brunelli8, Cinzia Martini9, Fabio Pellegrini10, Irene J Higginson11.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The quality of care provided to patients with cancer who are dying in hospital and their families is suboptimum. The UK Liverpool Care Pathway (LCP) for patients who are dying was developed with the aim of transferring the best practice of hospices to hospitals. We therefore assessed the effectiveness of LCP in the Italian context (LCP-I) in improving the quality of end-of-life care for patients with cancer in hospitals and for their family.
METHODS: In this pragmatic cluster randomised trial, 16 Italian general medicine hospital wards were randomly assigned to implement the LCP-I programme or standard health-care practice. For each ward, we identified all patients who died from cancer in the 3 months before randomisation (preintervention) and in the 6 months after the completion of the LCP-I training programme. The primary endpoint was the overall quality of care toolkit scale. Analysis was by intention to treat. This study is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01081899.
FINDINGS: During the postintervention assessment, data were gathered for 308 patients who died from cancer (147 in LCP-I programme wards and 161 in control wards). 232 (75%) of 308 family members were interviewed, 119 (81%) of 147 with relatives cared for in the LCP-I wards (mean cluster size 14·9 [range eight to 22]) and 113 (70%) of 161 in the control wards (14·1 [eight to 22]). After implementation of the LCP-I programme, no significant difference was noted in the distribution of the overall quality of care toolkit scores between the wards in which the LCP-I programme was implemented and the control wards (score 70·5 of 100 vs 63·0 of 100; cluster-adjusted mean difference 7·6 [95% CI -3·6 to 18·7]; p=0·186).
INTERPRETATION: The effect of the LCP-I programme in our study is less than the effects noted in earlier phase 2 trials. However, if the programme is implemented well it has the potential to reduce the gap in quality of care between hospices and hospitals. Further research is needed to ascertain what components of the LCP-I programme might be effective and to develop and assess a wider range of approaches to quality improvement in hospital care for people at the end of their lives and for their families. FUNDING: Italian Ministry of Health and Maruzza Lefebvre D'Ovidio Foundation-Onlus.
Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2013        PMID: 24139708     DOI: 10.1016/S0140-6736(13)61725-0

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Lancet        ISSN: 0140-6736            Impact factor:   79.321


  27 in total

1.  Palliative care: benefits of Liverpool Care Pathway.

Authors:  Lisa Hutchinson
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2013-11-05       Impact factor: 66.675

Review 2.  Models of Palliative Care Delivery for Patients With Cancer.

Authors:  David Hui; Eduardo Bruera
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2020-02-05       Impact factor: 44.544

3.  Use of a modified Liverpool care pathway in a tertiary Asian hospital: is there still a role for it?

Authors:  Ong Eng Koon; Shirlyn Neo Hui Shan; Sushma Shivananda; Tan Yung Ying; Arrynoer Thang; Aung Myat Kyawt; Ulina Santoso; Grace Pang Su Yin; Alethea Yee Chung Pheng; Patricia Neo Soek Hui
Journal:  J Palliat Med       Date:  2015-02-26       Impact factor: 2.947

Review 4.  End-of-life care pathways for improving outcomes in caring for the dying.

Authors:  Raymond J Chan; Joan Webster; Alison Bowers
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2016-02-12

Review 5.  Report of the Lancet Commission on the Value of Death: bringing death back into life.

Authors:  Libby Sallnow; Richard Smith; Sam H Ahmedzai; Afsan Bhadelia; Charlotte Chamberlain; Yali Cong; Brett Doble; Luckson Dullie; Robin Durie; Eric A Finkelstein; Sam Guglani; Melanie Hodson; Bettina S Husebø; Allan Kellehear; Celia Kitzinger; Felicia Marie Knaul; Scott A Murray; Julia Neuberger; Seamus O'Mahony; M R Rajagopal; Sarah Russell; Eriko Sase; Katherine E Sleeman; Sheldon Solomon; Ros Taylor; Mpho Tutu van Furth; Katrina Wyatt
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2022-02-01       Impact factor: 79.321

6.  Development of the care programme for the last days of life for older patients in acute geriatric hospital wards: a phase 0-1 study according to the Medical Research Council Framework.

Authors:  Rebecca Verhofstede; Tinne Smets; Joachim Cohen; Massimo Costantini; Nele Van Den Noortgate; Agnes van der Heide; Luc Deliens
Journal:  BMC Palliat Care       Date:  2015-05-09       Impact factor: 3.234

Review 7.  Diagnosing dying: an integrative literature review.

Authors:  Catriona Kennedy; Patricia Brooks-Young; Carol Brunton Gray; Phil Larkin; Michael Connolly; Bodil Wilde-Larsson; Maria Larsson; Tracy Smith; Susie Chater
Journal:  BMJ Support Palliat Care       Date:  2014-04-29       Impact factor: 3.568

Review 8.  Conceptualizing and Counting Discretionary Utilization in the Final 100 Days of Life: A Scoping Review.

Authors:  Paul R Duberstein; Michael Chen; Michael Hoerger; Ronald M Epstein; Laura M Perry; Sule Yilmaz; Fahad Saeed; Supriya G Mohile; Sally A Norton
Journal:  J Pain Symptom Manage       Date:  2019-10-19       Impact factor: 3.612

Review 9.  The changing nature of end of life care.

Authors:  Katrine Cauldwell; Paddy Stone
Journal:  Indian J Med Paediatr Oncol       Date:  2015 Apr-Jun

10.  'It doesn't do the care for you': a qualitative study of health care professionals' perceptions of the benefits and harms of integrated care pathways for end of life care.

Authors:  Katherine E Sleeman; Jonathan Koffman; Katherine Bristowe; Caroline Rumble; Rachel Burman; Sara Leonard; Jo Noble; Odette Dampier; William Bernal; Myfanwy Morgan; Philip Hopkins; Wendy Prentice; Irene J Higginson
Journal:  BMJ Open       Date:  2015-09-14       Impact factor: 2.692

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.