Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41120901›Full record

Trial reportBMC geriatrics2025

Comparison of the sustainability of the impact of team-based versus individual clinician-focused training of primary care professionals in serious illness conversations on caregiver burden of care: a secondary analysis of a cluster randomized trial.

Kouessiba Lorielle Lokossou, Odilon Quentin Assan, Souleymane Gadio, Claude-Bernard Uwizeye, Suélène Georgina Dofara, Dalil Asmaou Bouba, Sabrina Guay-Bélanger, LeAnn Michaels, Patrick Archambault, Jean-Sébastien Paquette and 5 more

Registry-linked trialAbstract readRandomized Controlled TrialComparative StudyMulticenter Study
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC geriatrics, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. It is linked to trial NCT03577002 (A Cluster-randomized Trial Comparing Team-based Versus Primary Care Clinician-led Advance Care Planning in the Meta-LARC Practice-based Research Networks), which is not on this map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–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.

NCT03577002 naunknown statusnot on this map

A Cluster-randomized Trial Comparing Team-based Versus Primary Care Clinician-led Advance Care Planning in the Meta-LARC Practice-based Research Networks

TypeinterventionalSponsorOregon Health and Science UniversityRan2019 to 2023Enrolled1,120ConditionsCongestive Heart Failure, Cancer, Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, Cerebrovascular AccidentArmsSerious Illness Care Program (SICP)
3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

15 authors.

Kouessiba Lorielle LokossouDepartment of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec, Quebec, Canada.
Odilon Quentin AssanVITAM - Centre de recherche en santé durable, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Souleymane GadioVITAM - Centre de recherche en santé durable, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Claude-Bernard UwizeyeVITAM - Centre de recherche en santé durable, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Suélène Georgina DofaraVITAM - Centre de recherche en santé durable, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Dalil Asmaou BoubaDepartment of Social and Preventive Medicine, Faculty of Medicine, Université Laval, Quebec, Quebec, Canada.
Sabrina Guay-BélangerVITAM - Centre de recherche en santé durable, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Québec, Québec, Canada.
LeAnn MichaelsOregon Rural Practice-based Research Network, Oregon Health & Science University, Oregon, USA.
Patrick ArchambaultVITAM - Centre de recherche en santé durable, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Jean-Sébastien PaquetteVITAM - Centre de recherche en santé durable, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Québec, Québec, Canada.
Shigeko IzumiSchool of Nursing, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA.
Annette M TottenDepartment of Medical Informatics & Clinical Epidemiology, School of Medicine, Oregon Health & Science University, Portland, Oregon, USA.
Louis-Paul RivestDepartment of Mathematics and Statistics, Faculty of Science and Engineering, Université Laval, Quebec, Quebec, Canada.
France LégaréVITAM - Centre de recherche en santé durable, Centre intégré universitaire de santé et de services sociaux de la Capitale-Nationale, Québec, Québec, Canada. france.legare@fmed.ulaval.ca.
Meta-LARC ACP Cluster Randomized Trial team

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundTraining health professionals in serious illness conversations is important for patients with serious illnesses and for their caregivers. However, most training focuses on individual clinicians rather than on healthcare teams. Caregivers of their patients are highly sensitive to changes in communication dynamics in the healthcare setting. We aimed to compare the impact of a team-based training program in serious illness conversations with that of an individual clinician-focused training program on the burden of care of caregivers of patients with serious illnesses, and the sustainability of these impacts over time.

methodsWe performed a secondary analysis of caregivers’ data from a preliminary cluster randomized trial in the USA and Canada in which 42 primary care clinics were randomized to an interprofessional team-based training arm (intervention) or an individual clinician-focused training arm (control). Seriously ill patients who had had a serious illness conversation with the trained clinicians were asked to refer a caregiver. We used the Zarit Burden Interview (range: 0–48) to assess caregiver burden immediately after the serious illness conversation (T1), six months later (T2) and 12 months later (T3). Statistical analyses using a linear mixed model were performed to compare caregiver burden between the two arms at the three times.

resultsWe included 192 caregivers from 42 primary care clinics. Most were female (67.8%); aged 65–74 (28.6%). The mean caregiver burden scores were low, and similar in both the arms at the three times. The difference in mean burden between the two study arms was 1.05 (95% CI -1.47 to 3.59; p = 0.40), -0.24 (95% CI -2.57 to 2.08; p = 0.82), and 0.09 (95% CI -2.61 to 2.81; p = 0.94) at T1, T2 and T3 respectively. The p-value of the interaction term between study arm and time was p = 0.47. Mean difference between arms after performing a model with time effect and after adjusting was 0.90 (95% CI -0.76 to 2.57; p = 0.28). Various other factors such as caregivers feeling anxious or depressed were associated with caregiver burden.

conclusionAnalysis showed that there was no difference between perceived caregiver burden after the interprofessional team-based training approach and after the individual clinician-focused training approach. Our study did however underline the importance of recognizing other factors influencing caregiver well-being.

trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT03577002).

Indexed as

Caregiver BurdenCaregiversCommunicationCost of IllnessPatient Care TeamPrimary Health CareAgedCluster AnalysisFemaleHumansMaleMiddle AgedAdvance care planningCaregiver burdenFamily caregiversHealth care professional trainingSerious illness conversationsZarit burden interview

Identifiers

PMID41120901
PMCPMC12539160

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
Read underepoch 390

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.