-
Palliative medicine · Dec 2020
Process evaluation of the Cancer Home-Life Intervention: What can we learn from it for future intervention studies?
- Karen la Cour, Gregersen Oestergaard Lisa L DEFACTUM, Central Denmark Region, Aarhus, Denmark. Department of Physiother, Åse Brandt, Sara Marie Hebsgaard Offersen, Line Lindahl-Jacobsen, Malcolm Cutchin, and Marc Sampedro Pilegaard.
- REHPA, The Danish Knowledge Centre for Rehabilitation and Palliative Care, Odense University Hospital and University of Southern Denmark, Nyborg, Denmark.
- Palliat Med. 2020 Dec 1; 34 (10): 1425-1435.
BackgroundThe Cancer Home-Life Intervention showed no significant effects, and examination of the processes affecting or inhibiting outcomes is relevant.AimTo evaluate the Cancer Home-Life Intervention for its processes of implementation, mechanisms of impact and contextual factors.DesignProcess evaluation conducted alongside the randomised controlled trial, using quantitative and qualitative methods (ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02356627). The Cancer Home-Life Intervention is a tailored, occupational therapy-based programme.Setting/ParticipantsThis study took place in participants' homes and at hospital. A total of 113 home-dwelling adults (⩾18 years) with advanced cancer who had received the Cancer Home-Life Intervention were included, together with five intervention-therapists.ResultsAll 113 participants (100%) received a first home visit; 32 participants (26%) received a second visit; and 4 participants (3%) received a third visit. Median number of delivered intervention components were 3 (interquartile range: 2; 4). Identified barriers for effect included unclear decision process for intervention dosage; participants' low expectations; participants' lack of energy; and insufficient time to adopt new strategies. The trial design constituted a barrier as the intervention could only be provided within a specific short period of time and not when relevant. Intervention components working to solve practical everyday problems, enhance enjoyment and increase a sense of safety were perceived as useful.ConclusionFuture interventions can benefit from inclusion criteria closely related to the intervention focus and clear procedures for when to continue, follow-up and terminate intervention. Decisions about dose and timing may benefit from learning theory by taking into account the time and practice needed to acquire new skills.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.