Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26201750›Full record

Trial reportSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2016

Improving cancer patients' knowledge about totally implantable access port: a randomized controlled trial.

Michela Piredda, Valentina Biagioli, Diana Giannarelli, Daniele Incletoli, Francesca Grieco, Massimiliano Carassiti, Maria Grazia De Marinis

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Trial report in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Observational
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

7 authors.

Michela PireddaResearch Unit Nursing Science, Campus Bio-Medico di Roma University, Via Alvaro del Portillo, 21-00128, Rome, Italy. m.piredda@unicampus.it.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5998-476X
Valentina BiagioliSchool of Nursing, Faculty of Medicine, Department of Biomedicine and Prevention, Tor Vergata University, Via Montpellier, 1-00133, Rome, Italy.
Diana GiannarelliBiostatistical Unit, Regina Elena National Cancer Institute, Via Elio Chianesi, 53-00144, Rome, Italy.
Daniele IncletoliResearch Unit Nursing Science, Campus Bio-Medico di Roma University, Via Alvaro del Portillo, 21-00128, Rome, Italy.
Francesca GriecoResearch Unit Nursing Science, Campus Bio-Medico di Roma University, Via Alvaro del Portillo, 21-00128, Rome, Italy.
Massimiliano CarassitiDepartment of Anesthesia Intensive Care and Pain Management, Campus Bio-Medico University Hospital, Via Alvaro del Portillo, 21-00128, Rome, Italy.
Maria Grazia De MarinisResearch Unit Nursing Science, Campus Bio-Medico di Roma University, Via Alvaro del Portillo, 21-00128, Rome, Italy.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeProviding patients with written information about totally implantable access ports (TIAPs) is recommended during the pre-implantation period to reduce anxiety and to help recalling information. No study tested the effectiveness of information about TIAP neither with oral communication nor with booklets. This study aimed at evaluating the effectiveness of an information booklet, alone or together with answers to clarification questions, both in improving patients' short- and long-time knowledge about TIAP and in decreasing patients' physiological indicators of anxiety immediately after TIAP implantation.

methodsThis is a randomized controlled trial with three parallel groups: group A (n = 34) receiving only the booklet, group B (n = 34) receiving the booklet with answers to clarification questions, and group C (n = 37) receiving routine care.

resultsAfter 3 months, pair comparisons revealed a significant improvement in knowledge of TIAP in each group (p < 0.001), together with a significant difference in group C compared with groups A (p < 0.001) and B (p < 0.001), similar to each other. Physiological indicators of anxiety decreased in the intervention groups compared to control group immediately after TIAP implantation.

conclusionsThe interventions provided resulted effective in decreasing patients' physiological indicators of anxiety immediately after TIAP implantation and improving patients' knowledge about TIAP immediately and at 3 months. Adding answers to clarification questions to the booklet was not more effective than the booklet alone. A well-designed booklet with attention both to scientific content and to communication techniques is useful in improving patients' knowledge about TIAP and reducing anxiety.

Indexed as

Catheterization, Central VenousHealth Knowledge, Attitudes, PracticeProstheses and ImplantsAgedFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedNeoplasmsPatient Education as TopicPreoperative CareTreatment OutcomeCentral venous cathetersNeoplasmsPatient education handoutPatient informationPreoperative care

Identifiers

PMID26201750

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.