1. The impact of outpatient versus inpatient management on health-related quality of life outcomes for patients with malignant pleural effusion: the OPTIMUM randomised clinical trial.
- Author
-
Sivakumar P, Fitzgerald DB, Ip H, Rao D, West A, Noorzad F, Wallace D, Haris M, Prudon B, Hettiarachchi G, Jayaram D, Goldring J, Maskell N, Holme J, Sharma N, Ismail I, Kadwani O, Simpson S, Read CA, Sun X, Douiri A, Lee YCG, and Ahmed L
- Subjects
- Humans, Catheters, Indwelling adverse effects, Inpatients, Quality of Life, Talc therapeutic use, Pleurodesis, Treatment Outcome, Outpatients, Pleural Effusion, Malignant therapy, Pleural Effusion, Malignant etiology
- Abstract
Background: The principal aim of malignant pleural effusion (MPE) management is to improve health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and symptoms., Methods: In this open-label randomised controlled trial, patients with symptomatic MPE were randomly assigned to either indwelling pleural catheter (IPC) insertion with the option of talc pleurodesis or chest drain and talc pleurodesis. The primary end-point was global health status, measured with the 30-item European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core Questionnaire (EORTC QLQ-C30) at 30 days post-intervention. 142 participants were enrolled from July 2015 to December 2019., Results: Of participants randomly assigned to the IPC (n=70) and chest drain (n=72) groups, primary outcome data were available in 58 and 56 patients, respectively. Global health status improved in both groups at day 30 compared with baseline: IPC (mean difference 13.11; p=0.001) and chest drain (mean difference 10.11; p=0.001). However, there was no significant between-group difference at day 30 (mean intergroup difference in baseline-adjusted global health status 2.06, 95% CI -5.86-9.99; p=0.61), day 60 or day 90. No significant differences were identified between groups in breathlessness and chest pain scores. All chest drain arm patients were admitted (median length of stay 4 days); seven patients in the IPC arm required intervention-related hospitalisation., Conclusions: While HRQoL significantly improved in both groups, there were no differences in patient-reported global health status at 30 days. The outpatient pathway using an IPC was not superior to inpatient treatment with a chest drain., Competing Interests: Conflict of interest: P. Sivakumar reports grants from Rocket Medical, outside the submitted work. D.B. Fitzgerald reports grants from the European Respiratory Society, outside the submitted work. N. Maskell reports grants and personal fees from Beckton Dickinson and Company, outside the submitted work. Y.C.G. Lee reports non-financial support and grants from Rocket Medical, outside the submitted work. L. Ahmed reports grants from GE, outside the submitted work. No other disclosures were reported., (Copyright ©The authors 2024. For reproduction rights and permissions contact permissions@ersnet.org.)
- Published
- 2024
- Full Text
- View/download PDF