Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28920137›Full record

ArticleSupportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer2018

Analysing the impact of a case management model on the specialised palliative care multi-professional team.

Julia Strupp, Christina Dose, Ulrike Kuhn, Maren Galushko, Anne Duesterdiek, Nicole Ernstmann, Holger Pfaff, Christoph Ostgathe, Raymond Voltz, Heidrun Golla

Abstract read
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Article in Supportive care in cancer : official journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care in Cancer, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
11.9field-weighted citation impact, top 1% of its field
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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it, 58 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
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

10 authors at 5 institutions in 2 countries.

Julia StruppDepartment of Palliative Medicine, Medical Faculty of the University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany. julia.strupp@uk-koeln.de.
Christina DoseDepartment of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, Psychosomatics and Psychotherapy, Medical Faculty of the University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Ulrike KuhnCatholic University of Applied Sciences, Cologne, Germany.
Maren GalushkoDepartment of Palliative Medicine, Medical Faculty of the University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Anne DuesterdiekDepartment of Palliative Medicine, Medical Faculty of the University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Nicole ErnstmannCenter for Health Communication and Health Services Research, Department of Psychosomatic Medicine and Psychotherapy, University Hospital Bonn, Bonn, Germany.
Holger PfaffInstitute of Medical Sociology, Health Services Research, and Rehabilitation Science (IMVR), University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany.
Christoph OstgatheDepartment of Palliative Medicine, Comprehensive Cancer Center CCC Erlangen-EMN, University Hospital Erlangen, Friedrich-Alexander-University (FAU) Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany.
Raymond VoltzDepartment of Palliative Medicine, Medical Faculty of the University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
Heidrun GollaDepartment of Palliative Medicine, Medical Faculty of the University of Cologne, Kerpener Str. 62, 50937, Cologne, Germany.
University of Cologne · DECatholic University of Applied Sciences · DEComprehensive Cancer Center Erlangen · DEIntegrated Oncology (United States) · USUniversity Hospital Bonn · DE

Funding

Deutsche Krebshilfe Az. 107647
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposePalliative care (PC) involves many health care providers leading to a high complexity of structures that requires efficient coordination as provided by case management (CM). Our study aimed to evaluate the effects of CM newly implemented in a specialised palliative care unit by evaluating team members' tasks and time resources before (T0) and after implementation (T1). It was hypothesised that team members would be able to spend less time on organisational and administrative tasks and more time on patient care.

methodsA prospective pre-post study design was used. Time distribution of different tasks at T0 and T1 was compared between three different professional groups: physicians, nursing staff and social work. To document their tasks and time required, a documentation form with several items for each profession was developed. Data was analysed using t tests for independent samples.

resultsAfter Bonferroni correction, a significant pre-post difference was found for the time spent on "discharge interview and discharge" as rated by the physicians (p < .001) with less time spent on this activity after CM implementation. The nursing staff had significantly more time for "conversations with patients" (p < .001) after CM implementation. Moreover, they spent significantly less time on "patient-related requests/advice by telephone" (p < .001) and "discussions with relatives/participation in family discussions" at post-assessment (p < .001). The social worker had significantly more time for "patient advice and support services" (p = .013) after CM implementation.

conclusionsIntegrating CM can be time efficient and ensures team members to spend more time on their core tasks in patient care.

Indexed as

AdultCase ManagementFemaleHumansMalePalliative CareProspective StudiesTerminal CareCase managementEnd-of-life careMulti-professionalPalliative care

Identifiers

PMID28920137
OpenAlexW2754829101

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.