Telehealth vs In-Person Early Palliative Care for Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer: A Multisite Randomized Clinical Trial.

JAMA Pub Date : 2024-09-11 DOI:10.1001/jama.2024.13964
Joseph A Greer,Jennifer S Temel,Areej El-Jawahri,Simone Rinaldi,Mihir Kamdar,Elyse R Park,Nora K Horick,Kedie Pintro,Dustin J Rabideau,Lee Schwamm,Josephine Feliciano,Isaac Chua,Konstantinos Leventakos,Stacy M Fischer,Toby C Campbell,Michael W Rabow,Finly Zachariah,Laura C Hanson,Sara F Martin,Maria Silveira,Laura Shoemaker,Marie Bakitas,Jessica Bauman,Lori Spoozak,Carl Grey,Leslie Blackhall,Kimberly Curseen,Sean O'Mahony,Melanie M Smith,Ramona Rhodes,Amelia Cullinan,Vicki Jackson,
{"title":"Telehealth vs In-Person Early Palliative Care for Patients With Advanced Lung Cancer: A Multisite Randomized Clinical Trial.","authors":"Joseph A Greer,Jennifer S Temel,Areej El-Jawahri,Simone Rinaldi,Mihir Kamdar,Elyse R Park,Nora K Horick,Kedie Pintro,Dustin J Rabideau,Lee Schwamm,Josephine Feliciano,Isaac Chua,Konstantinos Leventakos,Stacy M Fischer,Toby C Campbell,Michael W Rabow,Finly Zachariah,Laura C Hanson,Sara F Martin,Maria Silveira,Laura Shoemaker,Marie Bakitas,Jessica Bauman,Lori Spoozak,Carl Grey,Leslie Blackhall,Kimberly Curseen,Sean O'Mahony,Melanie M Smith,Ramona Rhodes,Amelia Cullinan,Vicki Jackson,","doi":"10.1001/jama.2024.13964","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Importance\r\nNumerous studies show that early palliative care improves quality of life and other key outcomes in patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers, although most lack access to this evidence-based model of care.\r\n\r\nObjective\r\nTo evaluate whether delivering early palliative care via secure video vs in-person visits has an equivalent effect on quality of life in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC).\r\n\r\nDesign, Setting, and Participants\r\nRandomized, multisite, comparative effectiveness trial from June 14, 2018, to May 4, 2023, at 22 US cancer centers among 1250 patients within 12 weeks of diagnosis of advanced NSCLC and 548 caregivers.\r\n\r\nIntervention\r\nParticipants were randomized to meet with a specialty-trained palliative care clinician every 4 weeks either via video visit or in person in the outpatient clinic from the time of enrollment and throughout the course of disease. The video visit group had an initial in-person visit to establish rapport, followed by subsequent virtual visits.\r\n\r\nMain Outcomes and Measures\r\nEquivalence of the effect of video visit vs in-person early palliative care on quality of life at week 24 per the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung questionnaire (equivalence margin of ±4 points; score range: 0-136, with higher scores indicating better quality of life). Participants completed study questionnaires at enrollment and at weeks 12, 24, 36, and 48.\r\n\r\nResults\r\nBy 24 weeks, participants (mean age, 65.5 years; 54.0% women; 82.7% White) had a mean of 4.7 (video) and 4.9 (in-person) early palliative care encounters. Patient-reported quality-of-life scores were equivalent between groups (video mean, 99.7 vs in-person mean, 97.7; difference, 2.0 [90% CI, 0.1-3.9]; P = .04 for equivalence). Rate of caregiver participation in visits was lower for video vs in-person early palliative care (36.6% vs 49.7%; P < .001). Study groups did not differ in caregiver quality of life, patient coping, or patient and caregiver satisfaction with care, mood symptoms, or prognostic perceptions.\r\n\r\nConclusions and Relevance\r\nThe delivery of early palliative care virtually vs in person demonstrated equivalent effects on quality of life in patients with advanced NSCLC, underscoring the considerable potential for improving access to this evidence-based care model through telehealth delivery.\r\n\r\nTrial Registration\r\nClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03375489.","PeriodicalId":518009,"journal":{"name":"JAMA","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-11","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"JAMA","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2024.13964","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Importance Numerous studies show that early palliative care improves quality of life and other key outcomes in patients with advanced cancer and their caregivers, although most lack access to this evidence-based model of care. Objective To evaluate whether delivering early palliative care via secure video vs in-person visits has an equivalent effect on quality of life in patients with advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Design, Setting, and Participants Randomized, multisite, comparative effectiveness trial from June 14, 2018, to May 4, 2023, at 22 US cancer centers among 1250 patients within 12 weeks of diagnosis of advanced NSCLC and 548 caregivers. Intervention Participants were randomized to meet with a specialty-trained palliative care clinician every 4 weeks either via video visit or in person in the outpatient clinic from the time of enrollment and throughout the course of disease. The video visit group had an initial in-person visit to establish rapport, followed by subsequent virtual visits. Main Outcomes and Measures Equivalence of the effect of video visit vs in-person early palliative care on quality of life at week 24 per the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Lung questionnaire (equivalence margin of ±4 points; score range: 0-136, with higher scores indicating better quality of life). Participants completed study questionnaires at enrollment and at weeks 12, 24, 36, and 48. Results By 24 weeks, participants (mean age, 65.5 years; 54.0% women; 82.7% White) had a mean of 4.7 (video) and 4.9 (in-person) early palliative care encounters. Patient-reported quality-of-life scores were equivalent between groups (video mean, 99.7 vs in-person mean, 97.7; difference, 2.0 [90% CI, 0.1-3.9]; P = .04 for equivalence). Rate of caregiver participation in visits was lower for video vs in-person early palliative care (36.6% vs 49.7%; P < .001). Study groups did not differ in caregiver quality of life, patient coping, or patient and caregiver satisfaction with care, mood symptoms, or prognostic perceptions. Conclusions and Relevance The delivery of early palliative care virtually vs in person demonstrated equivalent effects on quality of life in patients with advanced NSCLC, underscoring the considerable potential for improving access to this evidence-based care model through telehealth delivery. Trial Registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03375489.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
针对晚期肺癌患者的远程医疗与面对面早期姑息治疗:多地点随机临床试验。
重要性大量研究表明,早期姑息治疗可改善晚期癌症患者及其护理者的生活质量和其他关键结果,尽管大多数患者无法获得这种循证护理模式。目的评估通过安全视频提供早期姑息治疗与面对面就诊是否对晚期非小细胞肺癌(NSCLC)患者的生活质量具有同等效果。设计、设置和参与者2018年6月14日至2023年5月4日,在美国22家癌症中心对1250名诊断为晚期NSCLC后12周内的患者和548名护理者进行了随机、多地点、比较效果试验。干预参与者被随机分配到经过专业培训的姑息治疗临床医生那里,从入院开始到整个病程中,每4周通过视频访问或在门诊亲自会面一次。主要结果和测量根据肺癌治疗功能评估问卷,第24周时视频访问与面对面早期姑息治疗对生活质量的影响相等(相等幅度为±4分;分值范围为0-136分,分值越高,生活质量越高):得分范围:0-136,得分越高表示生活质量越高)。结果到 24 周时,参与者(平均年龄 65.5 岁;54.0% 为女性;82.7% 为白人)平均接受了 4.7 次(视频)和 4.9 次(面对面)早期姑息治疗。两组患者报告的生活质量得分相当(视频平均值为 99.7,面对面平均值为 97.7;差异为 2.0 [90% CI,0.1-3.9];P = .04 表示相当)。视频早期姑息关怀与面对面早期姑息关怀相比,照护者参与探访的比例较低(36.6% vs 49.7%; P < .001)。研究组在照护者生活质量、患者应对能力、患者和照护者对照护的满意度、情绪症状或预后感知方面没有差异。结论和相关性早期姑息治疗的虚拟和面对面方式对晚期 NSCLC 患者生活质量的影响相当,强调了通过远程医疗方式改善这种循证照护模式的可获得性的巨大潜力:NCT03375489。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Chemistry Matters—From a Putative Peptide to Effective Treatments for Diabetes and Obesity Thirty-Five Years of HIV Research in Africa—An Interview With Winners of the 2024 Lasker-Bloomberg Public Service Award GLP-1 for Treating Obesity—Origin, History, and Evolution AIDS in Africa—Impact of Research Word Choice and the Patient Encounter.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1