Jennifer Philip1,2, Anna Collins1, Jane Staker3, Michael Murphy3. 1. Department of Medicine, University of Melbourne, Parkville, Australia. 2. Palliative Care Service, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Australia. 3. Department of Neurosurgery, St Vincent's Hospital Melbourne, Australia.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence to guide best approaches to supportive care delivery to patients with high-grade glioma. I-CoPE (Information, Coordination, Preparation and Emotional) is a structured supportive care approach for people with newly diagnosed high-grade glioma and their family carers. Delivered by a cancer care coordinator, I-CoPE consists of (1) staged information, (2) regular screening for needs, (3) communication and coordination, and (4) family carer engagement. This pilot study tested acceptability and preliminary effectiveness of I-CoPE, delivered over 3 transitions in the illness course, for people newly diagnosed with high-grade glioma and their carers. METHODS: I-CoPE was delivered at the identified transition times (at diagnosis, following the diagnostic hospitalization, following radiotherapy), with associated data collection (enrollment, 2 weeks, 12 weeks). Outcomes of interest included: acceptability/feasibility (primary); quality of life; needs for support; disease-related information needs; and carer preparedness to care (secondary). Descriptive statistics were used to assess acceptability outcomes, while patient and carer outcomes were assessed using repeated measures ANOVA. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients (53% male, mean age 60) and 31 carers (42% male) participated. I-CoPE was highly acceptable: 86% of eligible patients enrolled, and of these 88% completed the study. Following I-CoPE patients and carers reported fewer information needs (P < .001), while carers reported fewer unmet supportive care needs (P < .01) and increased preparedness to care (P = .04). Quality of life did not significantly change. CONCLUSION: A model of supportive care delivered based upon illness transitions is feasible, acceptable, and suggests preliminary efficacy in some areas. Formal randomized studies are now required.
BACKGROUND: There is limited evidence to guide best approaches to supportive care delivery to patients with high-grade glioma. I-CoPE (Information, Coordination, Preparation and Emotional) is a structured supportive care approach for people with newly diagnosed high-grade glioma and their family carers. Delivered by a cancer care coordinator, I-CoPE consists of (1) staged information, (2) regular screening for needs, (3) communication and coordination, and (4) family carer engagement. This pilot study tested acceptability and preliminary effectiveness of I-CoPE, delivered over 3 transitions in the illness course, for people newly diagnosed with high-grade glioma and their carers. METHODS: I-CoPE was delivered at the identified transition times (at diagnosis, following the diagnostic hospitalization, following radiotherapy), with associated data collection (enrollment, 2 weeks, 12 weeks). Outcomes of interest included: acceptability/feasibility (primary); quality of life; needs for support; disease-related information needs; and carer preparedness to care (secondary). Descriptive statistics were used to assess acceptability outcomes, while patient and carer outcomes were assessed using repeated measures ANOVA. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients (53% male, mean age 60) and 31 carers (42% male) participated. I-CoPE was highly acceptable: 86% of eligible patients enrolled, and of these 88% completed the study. Following I-CoPE patients and carers reported fewer information needs (P < .001), while carers reported fewer unmet supportive care needs (P < .01) and increased preparedness to care (P = .04). Quality of life did not significantly change. CONCLUSION: A model of supportive care delivered based upon illness transitions is feasible, acceptable, and suggests preliminary efficacy in some areas. Formal randomized studies are now required.
Entities:
Keywords:
high-grade glioma; quality of life; supportive care
Authors: S A McLachlan; A Allenby; J Matthews; A Wirth; D Kissane; M Bishop; J Beresford; J Zalcberg Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2001-11-01 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Stephen T Keir; Ann Bebe Guill; Karen E Carter; Lindsay C Boole; Lazaro Gonzales; Henry S Friedman Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2006-06-15 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: K E Steinhauser; N A Christakis; E C Clipp; M McNeilly; S Grambow; J Parker; J A Tulsky Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2001-09 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Roger Stupp; Warren P Mason; Martin J van den Bent; Michael Weller; Barbara Fisher; Martin J B Taphoorn; Karl Belanger; Alba A Brandes; Christine Marosi; Ulrich Bogdahn; Jürgen Curschmann; Robert C Janzer; Samuel K Ludwin; Thierry Gorlia; Anouk Allgeier; Denis Lacombe; J Gregory Cairncross; Elizabeth Eisenhauer; René O Mirimanoff Journal: N Engl J Med Date: 2005-03-10 Impact factor: 91.245
Authors: Sarah K Rosenbloom; David E Victorson; Elizabeth A Hahn; Amy H Peterman; David Cella Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2007-12 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Stacey Panozzo; Anna Collins; Sue-Anne McLachlan; Rosalind Lau; Brian Le; Mary Duffy; Jennifer A Philip Journal: Asia Pac J Oncol Nurs Date: 2019 Oct-Dec
Authors: Tamara Ownsworth; Katarzyna Lion; Ursula M Sansom-Daly; Kerryn Pike; Eng-Siew Koh; Georgia K B Halkett; Mark B Pinkham; Raymond J Chan; Haryana M Dhillon Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2022-04-02 Impact factor: 3.955