Jane Turner1,2, Brian Kelly3, David Clarke4, Patsy Yates5, Sanchia Aranda6,7, Damien Jolley8, Andrew Forbes9, Suzanne Chambers10, Maryanne Hargraves11,12, Lisa Mackenzie13. 1. School of Medicine, University of Queensland and Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia. jane.turner@uq.edu.au. 2. Level K, Mental Health Centre, Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Herston, QLD, 4029, Australia. jane.turner@uq.edu.au. 3. University of Newcastle and John Hunter Hospital, Newcastle, Australia. 4. Monash Medical Centre, Melbourne, Australia. 5. Institute of Health and Biomedical Innovation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia. 6. Cancer Institute New South Wales, Sydney, Australia. 7. Peter MacCallum Cancer Centre, Melbourne, Australia. 8. School of Public Health and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. 9. Department of Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine, Monash University, Melbourne, Australia. 10. Menzies Health Institute Queensland, Griffith University, Brisbane, Australia. 11. ICON Cancer Services, Brisbane, Australia. 12. School of Nursing and Midwifery, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Australia. 13. School of Medicine, University of Queensland and Royal Brisbane and Women's Hospital, Brisbane, Australia.
Abstract
PURPOSE: A stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of a brief psychosocial intervention for depressed cancer patients, delivered by trained front-line health professionals in routine clinical care. METHODS:Nine hundred two patients were assessed across four treatment centres which were allocated in random order from control epoch to intervention epoch. Eligible patients had Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores of 8 or greater. Of eligible patients, 222 were recruited in control epoch and 247 in intervention epoch. Twenty-seven health professionals (HPs) were trained to deliver the psychosocial intervention consisting of up to four sessions, tailored to patient symptoms and distress. HPs participated in group supervision with a psychiatrist. The primary outcome, analysed by intention to treat, was depression measured with the HADS at 10 weeks after receiving the intervention. RESULTS: At 10-week follow-up, there were no significant differences in HADS score for the 181 patients in control epoch and 177 in intervention epoch (adjusted difference -1.23, 95 % CI -3.81--1.35, p = 0.35). Patients with disease progression who received the intervention experienced significant benefits in unmet practical support needs including care and support, information, and physical and daily living. CONCLUSION: A brief psychosocial intervention delivered by front-line oncology health professionals is feasible to deliver but is insufficient as a stand-alone treatment for depression in cancer patients. Psychosocial interventions should be targeted to populations most likely to experience benefit.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE: A stepped-wedge cluster-randomised controlled trial was conducted to evaluate the feasibility and effectiveness of a brief psychosocial intervention for depressed cancerpatients, delivered by trained front-line health professionals in routine clinical care. METHODS: Nine hundred two patients were assessed across four treatment centres which were allocated in random order from control epoch to intervention epoch. Eligible patients had Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) scores of 8 or greater. Of eligible patients, 222 were recruited in control epoch and 247 in intervention epoch. Twenty-seven health professionals (HPs) were trained to deliver the psychosocial intervention consisting of up to four sessions, tailored to patient symptoms and distress. HPs participated in group supervision with a psychiatrist. The primary outcome, analysed by intention to treat, was depression measured with the HADS at 10 weeks after receiving the intervention. RESULTS: At 10-week follow-up, there were no significant differences in HADS score for the 181 patients in control epoch and 177 in intervention epoch (adjusted difference -1.23, 95 % CI -3.81--1.35, p = 0.35). Patients with disease progression who received the intervention experienced significant benefits in unmet practical support needs including care and support, information, and physical and daily living. CONCLUSION: A brief psychosocial intervention delivered by front-line oncology health professionals is feasible to deliver but is insufficient as a stand-alone treatment for depression in cancerpatients. Psychosocial interventions should be targeted to populations most likely to experience benefit.
Authors: Kathleen Ell; Bin Xie; Brenda Quon; David I Quinn; Megan Dwight-Johnson; Pey-Jiuan Lee Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2008-09-20 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Nicole M Rankin; Jennifer A Barron; Lisbeth G Lane; Catherine A Mason; Sue Sinclair; James F Bishop Journal: Aust Health Rev Date: 2011-05 Impact factor: 1.990
Authors: Jane Walker; Christian Holm Hansen; Paul Martin; Stefan Symeonides; Charlie Gourley; Lucy Wall; David Weller; Gordon Murray; Michael Sharpe Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2014-08-27 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Suzanne K Chambers; Lee Ritterband; Frances Thorndike; Lisa Nielsen; Joanne F Aitken; Samantha Clutton; Paul Scuffham; Philippa Youl; Bronwyn Morris; Peter Baade; Jeffrey Dunn Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2017-06-23 Impact factor: 2.692