Search

Objectives To examine the extent of the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the mental health and well-being of mental health professionals (MHPs) in the Netherlands and understand their needs during the COVID-19 pandemic. Design and setting A cross-sectional, mixed-methods study was conducted with MHPs from the Netherlands from June 2020 to October 2020, consisting of an online survey and three online focus group discussions. Participants Participants were MHPs from various occupational groups (psychologists, social workers, mental health nurses, developmental education workers, etc). Primary and secondary outcome measures The online survey included questions about work-related changes due to COVID-19 perceived resilience to stress, changes in lifestyle behaviours and mental health symptoms. The focus group discussions focused mostly on work experiences during the first wave of the COVID-19 pandemic. Results MHP's reported an increase in experience workload during the pandemic (mean score 8.04 based on a scale of 1-10) compared to before the pandemic (mean score of 7). During the first wave of the pandemic, 50% of respondents reported increased stress, 32% increased sleeping problems and 24% increased mental health problems. Adverse occupational (eg, increased workload OR 1.72, 95% CI 1.28-2.32), psychological (eg, life satisfaction OR 0.63, 95% CI 0.52-0.75), lifestyle (eg, increased sleep problems OR 2.80, 95% CI 2.07-3.80) and physical factors (decline in physical health OR 3.56, 95% CI 2.61-4.85) were associated with a decline in mental health. Participants expressed significant concern in the focus group discussions about the duration of the pandemic, the high workload, less work-life balance and lack of contact with colleagues. Suggestions to improve working conditions included ensuring clear communication about guidelines and facilitating worker contact and support via peer-to-peer coaching where experiences can be shared. Conclusions The current study ind

Purpose: Clear information and supportive care are necessary for patients with cancer to effectively manage their condition. Traditionally, healthcare professionals offer information and support via the so-called formal care route. In addition, research has found favorable effects of informal care provided by volunteer programs and informal “walk-in support centers.” Less research has been done on initiatives that combine formal and complementary informal supportive care for patients with cancer. This systematic literature study aimed to discover (1) which types of initiatives are described in the literature, (2) what type of care they offer, and (3). how they are evaluated in terms of outcome measures. Methods: We performed a systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and CINAHL. Studies were included if the collaboration between one type of formal care together with one type of informal care was explicitly mentioned in the article. The search was not restricted to a specific cancer type. Results: A total of 4869 records were retrieved and 18 studies were included. In most studies, the care provided consisted of emotional support for, and/or providing information to, patients and their families. Initiatives were evaluated with interviews and questionnaires. Patients with cancer reported that they were satisfied with the care offered, including information, social and emotional support, help with activities of daily living, and family-related issues. Volunteers reported that visits they made were experienced positive and rewarding and the volunteers were confident about their contribution to general healthcare. Some negative experiences were reported by volunteers, e.g., interference of their own cancer diagnosis with volunteer work. The importance of proper training was stressed. Conclusions: Initiatives combining formal and informal supportive care hold the potential of added value in terms of providing emotional support for, and providing infor

Background People with advanced cancer often suffer from various symptoms, which can arise from the cancer itself and its treatment, the illness experience, and/or co-morbid conditions. Important patient-reported outcomes such as functional status, symptom severity, and quality of life (QoL) might differ between countries, as countries vary with regard to contextual factors such as their healthcare system. Purpose To assess self-reported emotional functioning, physical functioning, symptoms, and overall QoL in patients with advanced lung or colorectal cancer from six European countries, particularly in relation to their country of residence. Methods We used baseline patient data from the ACTION trial, including socio-demographic and clinical data as well as patient-reported data regarding functioning, symptoms, and overall QoL (EORTC QLQ-C15-PAL). Results Data from 1117 patients (55% lung cancer stage III/IV, 45% colorectal cancer stage IV) were used. The highest (worst) average symptom score was found for fatigue. We found similarities but also important differences in the outcomes across countries. The best scores (the highest for emotional functioning and QoL, the lowest for symptoms) were reported by Dutch and Danish patients. Belgian patients reported relatively low emotional functioning. Conclusion The optimization of functioning, symptom relief, and overall QoL should be important objectives of healthcare professionals who take care of patients with advanced cancer. There are similarities, but also substantial differences across countries in functional status, symptoms, and overall QoL. Policymakers should take these differences into account and invest in offering health care catered to the needs of their population.

PURPOSE: Quality of life (QoL) is an important yet complex outcome of care in patients with advanced cancer. QoL is associated with physical and psychosocial symptoms and with patients' illness perceptions (IPs). IPs are modifiable cognitive constructs developed to make sense of one's illness. It is unclear how IPs influence patients' QoL. A better understanding of this relationship can inform and direct high quality care aimed at improving patients' QoL. We therefore investigated the mediating role of anxiety and depression in the association of IPs with QoL.METHODS: Data from 377 patients with advanced cancer were used from the PROFILES registry. Patients completed measures on IPs (BIPQ), QoL (EORTC QLQ-C30), and symptoms of anxiety and depression (HADS). Mediation analyses were conducted to decompose the total effect of IPs on QoL into a direct effect and indirect effect.RESULTS: All IPs but one ("Comprehensibility") were negatively associated with QoL (p<0.001); patients with more negative IPs tended to have worse QoL. The effect was strongest for patients who felt that their illness affected their life more severely ("Consequences"), patients who were more concerned about their illness ("Concern"), and patients who thought that their illness strongly affected them emotionally ("Emotions"). Anxiety mediated 41-87% and depression mediated 39-69% of the total effect of patients' IPs on QoL.CONCLUSION: Negative IPs are associated with worse QoL. Anxiety and depression mediate this association. Targeting symptoms of anxiety and depression, through the modification of IPs, has the potential to improve QoL of patients with advanced cancer.

Background Advance care planning (ACP) supports individuals to define, discuss, and record goals and preferences for future medical treatment and care. Despite being internationally recommended, randomised clinical trials of ACP in patients with advanced cancer are scarce. Methods and findings To test the implementation of ACP in patients with advanced cancer, we conducted a cluster-randomised trial in 23 hospitals across Belgium, Denmark, Italy, Netherlands, Slovenia, and United Kingdom in 2015–2018. Patients with advanced lung (stage III/IV) or colorectal (stage IV) cancer, WHO performance status 0–3, and at least 3 months life expectancy were eligible. The ACTION Respecting Choices ACP intervention as offered to patients in the intervention arm included scripted ACP conversations between patients, family members, and certified facilitators; standardised leaflets; and standardised advance directives. Control patients received care as usual. Main outcome measures were quality of life (operationalised as European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer [EORTC] emotional functioning) and symptoms. Secondary outcomes were coping, patient satisfaction, shared decision-making, patient involvement in decision-making, inclusion of advance directives (ADs) in hospital files, and use of hospital care. In all, 1,117 patients were included (442 intervention; 675 control), and 809 (72%) completed the 12-week questionnaire. Patients’ age ranged from 18 to 91 years, with a mean of 66; 39% were female. The mean number of ACP conversations per patient was 1.3. Fidelity was 86%. Sixteen percent of patients found ACP conversations distressing. Mean change in patients’ quality of life did not differ between intervention and control groups (T-score −1.8 versus −0.8, p = 0.59), nor did changes in symptoms, coping, patient satisfaction, and shared decision-making. Specialist palliative care (37% versus 27%, p = 0.002) and AD inclusion in hospital files (10% versus 3%, p &lt

Purpose: Writing an Advance Directive (AD) is often seen as a part of Advance Care Planning (ACP). ADs may include specific preferences regarding future care and treatment and information that provides a context for healthcare professionals and relatives in case they have to make decisions for the patient. The aim of this study was to get insight into the content of ADs as completed by patients with advanced cancer who participated in ACP conversations. Methods: A mixed methods study involving content analysis and descriptive statistics was used to describe the content of completed My Preferences forms, an AD used in the intervention arm of the ACTION trial, testing the effectiveness of the ACTION Respecting Choices ACP intervention. Results: In total, 33% of 442 patients who received the ACTION RC ACP intervention completed a My Preferences form. Document completion varied per country: 10.4% (United Kingdom), 20.6% (Denmark), 29.2% (Belgium), 41.7% (the Netherlands), 61.3% (Italy) and 63.9% (Slovenia). Content analysis showed that ‘maintaining normal life’ and ‘experiencing meaningful relationships’ were important for patients to live well. Fears and worries mainly concerned disease progression, pain or becoming dependent. Patients hoped for prolongation of life and to be looked after by healthcare professionals. Most patients preferred to be resuscitated and 44% of the patients expressed maximizing comfort as their goal of future care. Most patients preferred ‘home’ as final place of care. Conclusions: My Preferences forms provide some insights into patients’ perspectives and preferences. However, understanding the reasoning behind preferences requires conversations with patients.

Purpose: Writing an Advance Directive (AD) is often seen as a part of Advance Care Planning (ACP). ADs may include specific preferences regarding future care and treatment and information that provides a context for healthcare professionals and relatives in case they have to make decisions for the patient. The aim of this study was to get insight into the content of ADs as completed by patients with advanced cancer who participated in ACP conversations. Methods: A mixed methods study involving content analysis and descriptive statistics was used to describe the content of completed My Preferences forms, an AD used in the intervention arm of the ACTION trial, testing the effectiveness of the ACTION Respecting Choices ACP intervention. Results: In total, 33% of 442 patients who received the ACTION RC ACP intervention completed a My Preferences form. Document completion varied per country: 10.4% (United Kingdom), 20.6% (Denmark), 29.2% (Belgium), 41.7% (the Netherlands), 61.3% (Italy) and 63.9% (Slovenia). Content analysis showed that ‘maintaining normal life’ and ‘experiencing meaningful relationships’ were important for patients to live well. Fears and worries mainly concerned disease progression, pain or becoming dependent. Patients hoped for prolongation of life and to be looked after by healthcare professionals. Most patients preferred to be resuscitated and 44% of the patients expressed maximizing comfort as their goal of future care. Most patients preferred ‘home’ as final place of care. Conclusions: My Preferences forms provide some insights into patients’ perspectives and preferences. However, understanding the reasoning behind preferences requires conversations with patients.

OBJECTIVES: There is a need to improve the assessment of emotional functioning (EF). In the international Advance Care Planning: an Innovative Palliative Care Intervention to Improve Quality of Life in Cancer Patients - a Multi-Centre Cluster Randomized Clinical Trial (ACTION) trial involving patients with advanced cancer, EF was assessed by a customized 10-item short form (EF10). The EF10 is based on the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer (EORTC) EF item bank and has the potential for greater precision than the common EORTC Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 four-item scale (EF4). We assessed the relative validity (RV) of EF10 compared with EF4.METHODS: Patients from Belgium, Denmark, Italy, the Netherlands, Slovenia, and the United Kingdom completed EF10 and EF4, and provided data on generic quality of life, coping, self-efficacy, and personal characteristics. Based on clinical and sociodemographic variables and questionnaire responses, 53 "known groups" that were expected to differ were formed, for example, females versus males. The EF10 and EF4 were first independently compared within this known group, for example, the EF10 score of females vs the EF10 score of males. When these differences were significant, the RV was calculated for the comparison of the EF10 with the EF4.RESULTS: A total of 1028 patients (57% lung, 43% colorectal cancer) participated. Forty-five of the 53 known-groups comparisons were significantly different and were used for calculating the RV. In 41 of 45 (91%) comparisons, the RV was more than 1, meaning that EF10 had a higher RV than EF4. The mean RV of EF10 compared with that of EF4 was 1.41, indicating superior statistical power of EF10 to detect differences in EF.CONCLUSIONS: Compared with EF4, EF10 shows superior power, allowing a 20% to 34% smaller sample size without reducing power, when used as a primary outcome measure.

BACKGROUND: Awareness of preferences regarding medical care should be a central component of the care of patients with advanced cancer. Open communication can facilitate this but can occur in an ad hoc or variable manner. Advance care planning (ACP) is a formalized process of communication between patients, relatives and professional caregivers about patients' values and care preferences. It raises awareness of the need to anticipate possible future deterioration of health. ACP has the potential to improve current and future healthcare decision-making, provide patients with a sense of control, and improve their quality of life.METHODS/DESIGN: We will study the effects of the ACP program Respecting Choices on the quality of life of patients with advanced lung or colorectal cancer. In a phase III multicenter cluster randomised controlled trial, 22 hospitals in 6 countries will be randomised. In the intervention sites, patients will be offered interviews with a trained facilitator. In the control sites, patients will receive care as usual. In total, 1360 patients will be included. All participating patients will be asked to complete questionnaires at inclusion, and again after 2.5 and 4.5 months. If a patient dies within a year after inclusion, a relative will be asked to complete a questionnaire on end-of-life care. Use of medical care will be assessed by checking medical files. The primary endpoint is patients' quality of life at 2.5 months post-inclusion. Secondary endpoints are the extent to which care as received is aligned with patients' preferences, patients' evaluation of decision-making processes, quality of end-of-life care and cost-effectiveness of the intervention. A complementary qualitative study will be carried out to explore the lived experience of engagement with the Respecting Choices program from the perspectives of patients, their Personal Representatives, healthcare providers and facilitators.DISCUSSION: Transferring the concept of

Background: Awareness of preferences regarding medical care should be a central component of the care of patients with advanced cancer. Open communication can facilitate this but can occur in an ad hoc or variable manner. Advance care planning (ACP) is a formalized process of communication between patients, relatives and professional caregivers about patients' values and care preferences. It raises awareness of the need to anticipate possible future deterioration of health. ACP has the potential to improve current and future healthcare decision-making, provide patients with a sense of control, and improve their quality of life. Methods/Design: We will study the effects of the ACP program Respecting Choices on the quality of life of patients with advanced lung or colorectal cancer. In a phase III multicenter cluster randomised controlled trial, 22 hospitals in 6 countries will be randomised. In the intervention sites, patients will be offered interviews with a trained facilitator. In the control sites, patients will receive care as usual. In total, 1360 patients will be included. All participating patients will be asked to complete questionnaires at inclusion, and again after 2.5 and 4.5 months. If a patient dies within a year after inclusion, a relative will be asked to complete a questionnaire on end-of-life care. Use of medical care will be assessed by checking medical files. The primary endpoint is patients' quality of life at 2.5 months post-inclusion. Secondary endpoints are the extent to which care as received is aligned with patients' preferences, patients' evaluation of decision-making processes, quality of end-of-life care and cost-effectiveness of the intervention. A complementary qualitative study will be carried out to explore the lived experience of engagement with the Respecting Choices program from the perspectives of patients, their Personal Representatives, healthcare providers and facilitators. Discussion: Transferring the concept of ACP from care

Background: Currently, health care and medical decision-making at the end of life for older people are often insufficiently patient-centred. In this trial we study the effects of Advance Care Planning (ACP), a formalised process of timely communication about care preferences at the end of life, for frail older people. Methods/Design: We will conduct a cluster randomised controlled trial among older people residing in care homes or receiving home care in the Netherlands. The intervention group will receive the ACP program Respecting Choices (R) in addition to usual care. The control group will receive usual care only. Participants in both groups will fill out questionnaires at baseline and after 12 months. We hypothesize that ACP will lead to better patient activation in medical decision making and quality of life, while reducing the number of medical interventions and thus health care costs. Multivariate analysis will be used to compare differences between the intervention group and the control group at baseline and to compare differences in changes after 12 months following the inclusion. Discussion: Our study can contribute to more understanding of the effects of ACP on patient activation and quality of life in frail older people. Further, we will gain insight in the costs and cost-effectiveness of ACP. This study will facilitate ACP policy for older people in the Netherlands.