Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29594487›Full record

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

'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).

Steven Dodd, Matt Hill, Nick Ockenden, Guillermo Perez Algorta, Sheila Payne, Nancy Preston, Catherine Walshe

Abstract readCase Reports
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 14 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
14citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Trial
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

7 authors.

Steven DoddInternational Observatory on End of Life Care, Division of Health Research, Furness Building, Lancaster University, Bailrigg, Lancaster, LA1 4YG, UK.
Matt HillInstitute for Volunteering Research, NCVO, Society Building, 8 All Saints Street, London, N1 9RL, UK.
Nick OckendenInstitute for Volunteering Research, NCVO, Society Building, 8 All Saints Street, London, N1 9RL, UK.
Guillermo Perez AlgortaDivision of Health Research, Furness Building, Lancaster University, Bailrigg, Lancaster, LA1 4YG, UK.
Sheila PayneInternational Observatory on End of Life Care, Division of Health Research, Furness Building, Lancaster University, Bailrigg, Lancaster, LA1 4YG, UK.
Nancy PrestonInternational Observatory on End of Life Care, Division of Health Research, Furness Building, Lancaster University, Bailrigg, Lancaster, LA1 4YG, UK.
Catherine WalsheInternational Observatory on End of Life Care, Division of Health Research, Furness Building, Lancaster University, Bailrigg, Lancaster, LA1 4YG, UK. c.walshe@lancaster.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-4531-8608

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

purposeTo explore the perspectives of people anticipated to be in their last year of life, family carers, volunteers and staff on the impacts of receiving a volunteer-provided befriending service. Patient participants received up to 12 weeks of a volunteer-provided befriending intervention. Typically, this involved one visit per week from a trained volunteer. Such services complement usual care and are hoped to enhance quality of life.

methodsMultiple case study design (n = 8). Cases were end-of-life befriending services in home and community settings including UK-based hospices (n = 6), an acute hospital (n = 1) and a charity providing support to those with substance abuse issues (n = 1). Data collection incorporated qualitative thematic interviews, observation and documentary analysis. Framework analysis facilitated within and across case pattern matching.

resultsEighty-four people participated across eight sites (cases), including patients (n = 23), carers (n = 3), volunteers (n = 24) and staff (n = 34). Interview data are reported here. Two main forms of input were described-'being there' and 'doing for'. 'Being there' encapsulated the importance of companionship and the relational dynamic between volunteer and patient. 'Doing for' described the process of meeting social needs such as being able to leave the house with the volunteer. These had impacts on wellbeing with people describing feeling less lonely, isolated, depressed and/or anxious.

conclusionImpacts from volunteer befriending or neighbour services may be achieved through volunteers taking a more practical/goal-based orientation to their role and/or taking a more relational and emotional orientation. Training of volunteers must equip them to be aware of these differing elements of the role and sensitive to when they may create most impact.

trial registrationISRCTN12929812.

Indexed as

CaregiversFemaleHumansInterviews as TopicMalePalliative CareQualitative ResearchQuality of LifeTerminal CareVolunteersEnd of lifePalliative careQualitative researchVolunteers

Identifiers

PMID29594487
PMCPMC6096531

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC
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.