Trial reportBMC medicine2016
How effective are volunteers at supporting people in their last year of life? A pragmatic randomised wait-list trial in palliative care (ELSA).
Trial report in BMC medicine, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 papers, 3 of them syntheses that pooled 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.
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.
Who cites it
16 citing papers in PubMed, 3 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.
- Interventions Associated With Reduced Loneliness and Social Isolation in Older Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.JAMA network open · 2022Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Pooled it
- Peer support to maintain psychological wellbeing in people with advanced cancer: findings from a feasibility study for a randomised controlled trial.BMC palliative care · 2020Trial
- Perceived usefulness of new technologies in palliative care volunteering: mixed-methods study with stakeholders.BMC palliative care · 2025Article
- Social support sources for people with palliative care needs at home: a scoping review.BMC palliative care · 2025Article
- Interventions in ambulatory healthcare settings to reduce social isolation among adults aged 18-64: a systematic review.BJGP open · 2024Article
- Public health palliative care interventions that enable communities to support people who are dying and their carers: a scoping review of studies that assess person-centered outcomes.Frontiers in public health · 2023Article
- Scaling out a palliative compassionate community innovation: Nav-CARE.Palliative care and social practice · 2022Article
- The Compassionate Communities Connectors model for end-of-life care: implementation and evaluation.Palliative care and social practice · 2022Article
- How do befriending interventions alleviate loneliness and social isolation among older people? A realist evaluation study.PloS one · 2021Article
- A mixed-method evaluation of a volunteer navigation intervention for older persons living with chronic illness (Nav-CARE): findings from a knowledge translation study.BMC palliative care · 2020Article
- The Compassionate Communities Connectors model for end-of-life care: a community and health service partnership in Western Australia.Palliative care and social practice · 2020Article
- Volunteers in a biography project with palliative care patients - a feasibility study.BMC palliative care · 2019Article
- 'Being with' or 'doing for'? How the role of an end-of-life volunteer befriender can impact patient wellbeing: interviews from a multiple qualitative case study (ELSA).Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer · 2018Article
- A Study on the Motivations of Korean Hospice Volunteers.Indian journal of palliative careArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundClinical care alone at the end of life is unlikely to meet all needs. Volunteers are a key resource, acceptable to patients, but there is no evidence on care outcomes. This study aimed to determine whether support from a social action volunteer service is better than usual care at improving quality of life for adults in the last year of life.
methodsA pragmatic, multi-centre wait-list controlled trial, with participants randomly allocated to receive the volunteer support intervention either immediately or after a 4 week wait. Trained volunteers provided tailored face-to-face support including befriending, practical support and signposting to services, primarily provided within the home, typically for 2-3 hours per week. The primary outcome was rate of change of quality of life at 4 weeks (WHO QOL BREF, a general, culturally sensitive measure). Secondary outcomes included rate of change of quality of life at 8 weeks and Loneliness (De Jong Gierveld Loneliness Scale), social support (mMOS-SS), and reported use of health and social care services at 4 and 8 weeks.
resultsIn total, 196 adults (61% (n = 109) female; mean age 72 years) were included in the study. No significant difference was found in main or secondary outcomes at 4 weeks. Rate of change of quality of life showed trends in favour of the intervention (physical quality of life domain: b = 3.98, CI, -0.38 to 8.34; psychological domain: b = 2.59, CI, -2.24 to 7.43; environmental domain: b = 3, CI, -4.13 to 4.91). Adjusted analyses to control for hours of volunteer input found significantly less decrease in physical quality of life in the intervention group (slope (b) 4.43, CI, 0.10 to 8.76). While the intervention also favoured the rate of change of emotional (b = -0.08; CI, -0.52 to 0.35) and social loneliness (b = -0.20; CI, -0.58 to 0.18), social support (b = 0.13; CI, -0.13 to 0.39), and reported use of health and social care professionals (b = 0.16; CI, -0.22 to 0.55), these were not statistically significant. No adverse events were reported.
conclusionsClinicians can confidently refer to volunteer services at the end of life. Future research should focus on 'dose' to maximise likely impact.
trial registrationThe trial was prospectively registered. ISRCTN Registry: ISRCTN12929812 , registered 20 May 2015.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.