Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31710345›Full record

Trial reportJAMA internal medicine2020

Evaluation of a Palliative Care Program for Nursing Homes in 7 Countries: The PACE Cluster-Randomized Clinical Trial.

Lieve Van den Block, Elisabeth Honinx, Lara Pivodic, Rose Miranda, Bregje D Onwuteaka-Philipsen, Hein van Hout, H Roeline W Pasman, Mariska Oosterveld-Vlug, Maud Ten Koppel, Ruth Piers and 15 more

Open access · greenAbstract readMulticenter StudyRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in JAMA internal medicine, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 51 papers, 5 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
51citing papers in PubMed, 5 pooled it
11.8field-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

51 citing papers in PubMed, 5 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 112 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Palliative care interventions in advanced dementia.The Cochrane database of systematic reviews · 2021
    Pooled it
  5. Pooled it
  6. Trial
  7. Trial
  8. Trial
  9. Trial
  10. Trial
  11. Trial
  12. Trial
  13. Trial
  14. Trial
  15. Trial
  16. Trial
  17. Trial
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

25 authors at 9 institutions in 7 countries.

Lieve Van den BlockVUB-UGhent End-of-Life Care Research Group, Ghent University and Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussel, Belgium.
Elisabeth HoninxVUB-UGhent End-of-Life Care Research Group, Ghent University and Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussel, Belgium.
Lara PivodicVUB-UGhent End-of-Life Care Research Group, Ghent University and Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussel, Belgium.
Rose MirandaVUB-UGhent End-of-Life Care Research Group, Ghent University and Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussel, Belgium.
Bregje D Onwuteaka-PhilipsenAmsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Expertise Center for Palliative Care, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Hein van HoutAmsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Department of General Practice and Elderly Care Medicine, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
H Roeline W PasmanAmsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Expertise Center for Palliative Care, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Mariska Oosterveld-VlugAmsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Expertise Center for Palliative Care, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Maud Ten KoppelAmsterdam Public Health Research Institute, Expertise Center for Palliative Care, Department of Public and Occupational Health, Amsterdam UMC, Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
Ruth PiersVUB-UGhent End-of-Life Care Research Group, Ghent University and Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussel, Belgium.
Nele Van Den NoortgateVUB-UGhent End-of-Life Care Research Group, Ghent University and Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussel, Belgium.
Yvonne EngelsDepartment of Anesthesiology, Pain and Palliative Medicine, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Myrra Vernooij-DassenIQ Healthcare, Radboud University Medical Center, Nijmegen, the Netherlands.
Jo HockleyInternational Observatory on End-of-Life Care, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom.
Katherine FroggattInternational Observatory on End-of-Life Care, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom.
Sheila PayneInternational Observatory on End-of-Life Care, Lancaster University, Lancaster, United Kingdom.
Katarzyna SzczerbinskaUnit for Research on Aging Society, Department of Sociology of Medicine, Epidemiology and Preventive Medicine Chair, Faculty of Medicine, Jagiellonian University Medical College, Krakow, Poland.
Marika KylänenNational Institute for Health and Welfare, Helsinki, Finland.
Giovanni GambassiFondazione Policlinico Universitario A. Gemelli IRCCS, Rome, Italy.
Sophie PautexHôpitaux Universitaires de Genève, University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Catherine BassalCenter for the Interdisciplinary Study of Gerontology and Vulnerability (CIGEV), University of Geneva, Geneva, Switzerland.
Stefanie De BuysserBiostatistics Unit, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences, Ghent University, Belgium.
Luc DeliensVUB-UGhent End-of-Life Care Research Group, Ghent University and Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussel, Belgium.
Tinne SmetsVUB-UGhent End-of-Life Care Research Group, Ghent University and Vrije Universiteit Brussel (VUB), Brussel, Belgium.
PACE trial group
Vrije Universiteit Brussel · BEAmsterdam University Medical Centers · NLLancaster University · GBRadboud University Nijmegen · NLUniversity of Geneva · CHFinnish Institute for Health and Welfare · FIGhent University · BEJagiellonian University · PLUniversità Cattolica del Sacro Cuore · IT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Importance: High-quality evidence on how to improve palliative care in nursing homes is lacking. Objective: To investigate the effect of the Palliative Care for Older People (PACE) Steps to Success Program on resident and staff outcomes. Design, Setting, and Participants: A cluster-randomized clinical trial (2015-2017) in 78 nursing homes in 7 countries comparing PACE Steps to Success Program (intervention) with usual care (control). Randomization was stratified by country and median number of beds in each country in a 1:1 ratio. Interventions: The PACE Steps to Success Program is a multicomponent intervention to integrate basic nonspecialist palliative care in nursing homes. Using a train-the-trainer approach, an external trainer supports staff in nursing homes to introduce a palliative care approach over the course of 1 year following a 6-steps program. The steps are (1) advance care planning with residents and family, (2) assessment, care planning, and review of needs and problems, (3) coordination of care via monthly multidisciplinary review meetings, (4) delivery of high-quality care focusing on pain and depression, (5) care in the last days of life, and (6) care after death. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary resident outcome was comfort in the last week of life measured after death by staff using the End-of-Life in Dementia Scale Comfort Assessment While Dying (EOLD-CAD; range, 14-42). The primary staff outcome was knowledge of palliative care reported by staff using the Palliative Care Survey (PCS; range, 0-1). Results: Concerning deceased residents, we collected 551 of 610 questionnaires from staff at baseline and 984 of 1178 postintervention in 37 intervention and 36 control homes. Mean (SD) age at time of death ranged between 85.22 (9.13) and 85.91 (8.57) years, and between 60.6% (160/264) and 70.6% (190/269) of residents were women across the different groups. Residents' comfort in the last week of life did not differ between intervention and control groups (baseline-adjusted mean difference, -0.55; 95% CI, -1.71 to 0.61; P = .35). Concerning staff, we collected 2680 of 3638 questionnaires at baseline and 2437 of 3510 postintervention in 37 intervention and 38 control homes. Mean (SD) age of staff ranged between 42.3 (12.1) and 44.1 (11.7) years, and between 87.2% (1092/1253) and 89% (1224/1375) of staff were women across the different groups. Staff in the intervention group had statistically significantly better knowledge of palliative care than staff in the control group, but the clinical difference was minimal (baseline-adjusted mean difference, 0.04; 95% CI, 0.02-0.05; P < .001). Data analyses began on April 20, 2018. Conclusions and Relevance: Residents' comfort in the last week of life did not improve after introducing the PACE Steps to Success Program. Improvements in staff knowledge of palliative care were clinically not important. Trial Registration: ISRCTN Identifier: ISRCTN14741671.

Indexed as

Delivery of Health CareNursing HomesQuality of Health CareAdvance Care PlanningAgedAged, 80 and overContinuity of Patient CareDementiaDepressionFemaleHumansImplementation ScienceMaleNeeds AssessmentNursing AssistantsNursing Staff

Identifiers

PMID31710345
PMCPMC6865772
OpenAlexW2982737174

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.