Psychoeducation or psychoeducational interventions encompass a broad range of activities that combine education and other activities such as counseling and supportive interventions. Psychoeducational interventions may be delivered individually or in groups, and may be tailored or standardized. This type of intervention generally includes providing patients with information about treatments, symptoms, resources and services, training to provide care and respond to disease-related problems, and problem-solving strategies for coping with cancer. Interventions may include use of booklets, videos, audiotapes, and computers, and formats may be interactive between healthcare professionals and patients and caregivers, self-directed via use of CDs and other materials, online, or delivered telephonically. Studies using psychoeducational interventions tend to vary substantially in specific content, format, frequency, and timing of the interventions. For this reason, there is limited ability to currently examine the relative effectiveness of different formats and delivery methods. Highly specific content approaches, such as mindfulness-based stress reduction and cognitive behavioral approaches, are identified in these resources as separate interventions, rather than incorporated into overall psychoeducation.
Rueda, J. R., Sola, I., Pascual, A., & Subirana Casacuberta, M. (2011). Non-invasive interventions for improving well-being and quality of life in patients with lung cancer. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews (Online), 9, CD004282.
The objective of the systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of non-invasive interventions delivered by healthcare professionals in improving symptoms, psychological functioning, and quality of life.
Databases searched were Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, AMED, British Nursing Index and Archive, and reference lists from relevant studies.
Search keywords were non-invasive interventions and lung cancer.
Randomized controlled trials and controlled clinical trials were included. The trials included involved
A total of 20 references were retrieved. Two authors independently assessed all the references. Three of 15 studies included in this review were evaluated together in one category labeled “Nursing Interventions to Manage Breathlessness.” Of the three studies that focused solely on breathlessness, two studies previously were evaluated in the 2009 Putting Evidence Into Practice publication.
The final number of studies included was 15. The breathlessness category included 165 patients with lung cancer. The sample range across studies was 22-109.
Patients had lung cancer with refractory breathlessness, the majority of which were not receiving active therapy. Patients received breathlessness rehabilitation, which focused on emotional as well as physical aspects of the symptom, or breathlessness training intervention, described as training in diaphragmatic breathing, pacing, anxiety management, and relaxation.
The three studies found that the intervention was effective in improving the sensation of breathlessness at best and also had beneficial effects on performance status, functional ability, and depression. Due to the stage of disease and limited life expectancy of those diagnosed with advanced lung cancer, rapid deterioration and attrition were seen in one of the studies.
The studies of breathlessness management indicate that nurse-led breathing programs may produce beneficial effects and should be encouraged.
Zhao, I., & Yates, P. (2008). Non-pharmacological interventions for breathlessness management in patients with lung cancer: A systematic review. Palliative Medicine, 22(6), 693-701.
The objective of the article was to review studies that evaluated nonpharmacologic interventions for breathlessness management in patients with lung cancer.
Databases searched were Cochrane Library, EMBASE, PubMed, Ovid, EBSCO Host as a search engine for CINAHL, Pre-CINAHL (2007), Health Source: Nursing/Academic Edition, and MEDLINE (all searched 1990-July 2007).
Search keywords were breathlessness, dyspnea, management, interventions, treatment, non-pharmacological, and lung cancer.
Nonpharmacologic interventions for breathlessness in patients with lung cancer were included.
Pharmacologic interventions for breathlessness, studies that did not include patients with lung cancer, descriptive studies, and studies not published in English literature were excluded.
One hundred sixty-nine abstracts were retrieved, 15 articles were reviewed, and five studies ultimately were included. Studies were eliminated based on selection criteria. Standardized abstraction procedures were used to evaluate included studies.
A total of 370 patients were in the five studies included [Corner (20), Bredin (103), Connors (14) , Hately (30), Moore (203)].
All studies included behavioral, psychological, and educational interventions, although the method of delivery varied between studies.
Evidence is moderately strong to suggest benefit of a counseling and supportive educational intervention to alleviate breathlessness in patients with lung cancer. While all studies showed benefit with a multicomponent nonpharmacologic intervention approach, whether all components are warranted or whether one component is more/less effective than another is inconclusive.
Studies were limited by small sample size or high attrition rates.
Nurses should consider providing support and counseling for breathing techniques, relaxation, and breathing retraining in patients with breathlessness and lung cancer.
Bredin, M., Corner, J., Krishnasamy, M., Plant, H., Bailey, C., & A’Hern, R. (1999). Multicentre randomised controlled trial of nursing intervention for breathlessness in patients with lung cancer. BMJ, 318(7188), 901–904.
Patients diagnosed with lung cancer were randomized to attend a nursing clinic offering interventions for breathlessness versus best supportive care. The intervention consisted of
Control: received standard of care for breathlessness; best supportive care involved standard management and treatment available for dyspnea. Nurse specialists used and were taught the intervention in same way, using a practice guideline to ensure correct delivery of the intervention.
The study reported on a sample of 119 patients with lung cancer; the goal was to recruit 150 patients for 90% power. Data from 16 patients were lost because a center was dropped from the study. Final sample included 51 in the intervention group and 52 in the control group.
The study was conducted in nursing clinics in six hospital settings in London, United Kingdom.
The study design included randomization to either intervention or control group.
Outcome measures were conducted at baseline and at four and eight weeks.
The intervention group improved significantly at eight weeks in 5 of 11 items assessed.
Final sample included 51 in the intervention group and 52 in the control group. Attrition: 16 patients died, and 28 withdrew. Reasons for withdrawal: 1 improved condition, 16 had deterioration, 4 were unhappy with the assigned treatment arm, and 7 were for unknown reasons. Survival of patients who withdrew was significantly worse than the intervention arm (hazard ratio = 2.5; p < 0.05). Survival of all who withdrew versus nonwithdrawals was also significantly worse (p < 0.01). Overall survival of the intervention and control groups was not different. At baseline, both groups had high level of distress caused by breathlessness and associated functional impairment.
Overall conclusion is that patients attending nursing clinics for breathlessness experienced improvements in breathlessness, performance status, and physical and emotional status.
The analysis was based on the assumption that missing data from patients who withdrew because of poor outcomes were assigned a lower change score .The findings would have been more credible if outcomes were actually assessed. The method assumed that patients were able to show a change in either direction on rating scales, but patients who were on the extreme could only go in one direction. As stated in the Corner et al. (1996) pilot study, the contribution of each component of the intervention is unknown. Are all components needed to achieve the same outcome, or was one aspect of the intervention most significant?
Chan, C. W., Richardson, A., & Richardson, J. (2011). Managing symptoms in patients with advanced lung cancer during radiotherapy: results of a psychoeducational randomized controlled trial. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 41, 347–357.
To examine the effectiveness of a psychoeducational intervention (PEI) on the symptom cluster of anxiety, breathlessness, and fatigue compared with usual care.
Education on symptom management and coaching on the use of progressive muscle relaxation was delivered to patients one week prior to the start of radiotherapy (RT) and repeated three weeks after beginning RT. Symptom data were collected at four times points: prior to the intervention and at three, six, and 12 weeks postintervention.
The study was a randomized, controlled trial using a pre-/posttest design with two groups.
A significant difference (p = 0.003) was seen over time on the pattern of change of the symptom cluster between the PEI intervention and the usual care control group. Significant effects on patterns of changes in breathlessness (p = 0.002), fatigue (p = 0.011), anxiety (p = 0.001), and functional ability (p = 0.000) were found.
PEI is an effective treatment for relieving the symptom cluster of anxiety, breathlessness, and fatigue and each of the individually assessed symptoms.
The study provided evidence to support the symptom cluster of anxiety, breathlessness, and fatigue as interrelated, with assessment and management of those three symptoms as a cluster. Clarification of the nature of their interrelatedness is a potential area of further study. Education and counseling patients through nurses can be helpful in the management of these symptoms.
Connors, S., Graham, S., & Peel, T. (2007). An evaluation of a physiotherapy led non-pharmacological breathlessness programme for patients with intrathoracic malignancy. Palliative Medicine, 21(4), 285–287.
This program was conducted for four years. The study was based on prior research conducted by Corner et al. (1996) and Bredin et al. (1999), also reported elsewhere in the table.
The study reported on a sample of 169 patients. All patients reported breathlessness as a symptom. Patients were referred from three sources to a physiotherapist-led breathlessness program for patients with intrathoracic malignancy. The three sources included an outpatient lung cancer clinic, the inpatient unit, or the community where they were referred by a specialist palliative care team. A screening questionnaire was used to identify the cause of breathlessness. If the cause was reversible, the patient received appropriate care. Only 14 of 169 completed the entire program.
The following tools were used at one, four, and eight weeks.
Only 14 of 169 completed the entire program. The following are characteristics of the 14 who completed the program.
Of the 14 who completed the program, pre- and post-assessment scores showed modest improvement, but it was not statistically significant. The majority did not complete the program. One hundred thirty-one patients (85%) were seen at least once and anecdotally had subjective benefit. Of those who did not complete the program, some had progressive disease and were too ill to participate or died before being seen. Median survival was 95 days.
Patients with intra-thoracic cancer may benefit from a formal nonpharmacologic program. Patients who are frail and/or on palliative care may need a more flexible program.
One hundred fifty-five patients did not complete the program because of progressive disease and associated shorter survival. The small subset who did complete the program did not show significant improvement in dyspnea measures. Dropout rate was 82% versus 41% in the Corner study and 43% in the the Bredin study. Interventions in the three studies were similar. The difference in dropout rate for this study compared to Bredin and Corner’s studies is explained by the fact that the patients in this study were older and were recruited from the totality of patients with lung cancer presenting to the cancer center.
Corner, J., Plant, H., A’Hern, R., & Bailey, C. (1996). Non-pharmacological intervention for breathlessness in lung cancer. Palliative Medicine, 10(4), 299–305.
The intervention included weekly sessions with a nurse research practitioner, lasting one hour, using counseling, breathing retraining, relaxation, and the teaching of alternate coping and adaptation strategies. The interventions are the same as those commonly used to treat patients with chronic pulmonary disease. Patients were randomized either to an intervention group or control group. The intervention group met over a three- to six-week period. Additional follow-up sessions were available if necessary. The number of sessions was not stated. The control group received usual nursing care such as breathing assessment with documentation in the medical record.
The study reported on a sample of 20 patients with lung cancer. The patients had completed either chemotherapy or radiotherapy and were experiencing breathlessness.
The study was conducted in a nurse-led clinic in a specialist cancer center.
Randomized, controlled pilot study
Median scores on all measures were improved. Distress from breathlessness improved 53%, breathlessness at worst improved 35%, and functional capacity improved by 21%. Distress in the control group worsened by a median of 10%. Significant improvements compared with the control group were observed in breathlessness at best (p < 0.02) and at worst (p < 0.5), distress caused by breathlessness (p < 0.01), and functional capacity (p < 0.02). Improvements were not observed for anxiety or depression.
The study demonstrates that patients with lung cancer and breathlessness benefit from a rehabilitative approach.
The effect of time and attention on a weekly basis independent of intervention is unknown. The contribution of each component of the intervention is unknown. Are all components needed to achieve the same outcome, or was one aspect of the intervention most significant? The study had a small sample, and baseline data show that the intervention group rated distress caused by breathlessness higher than did the control group.
The study is valuable as a pilot study with an aim to test feasibility.
Farquhar, M.C., Prevost, A.T., McCrone, P., Brafman-Price, B., Bentley, A., Higginson, I.J., . . . Booth, S. (2014). Is a specialist breathlessness service more effective and cost-effective for patients with advanced cancer and their carers than standard care? Findings of a mixed-method randomised controlled trial. BMC Medicine, 12, 194-014-0194-2.
To evaluate the effects of a specialized breathlessness intervention service compared to usual care
The breathlessness intervention service (BIS) was a multidisciplinary complex intervention including nonpharmacologic and pharmacologic interventions to support patients with advanced disease and dyspnea. The BIS used first-stage interventions such as positioning to reduce the work of breathing, education, individualized exercise plans, relaxation techniques, sleep hygiene, cognitive behavioral therapy approaches, and other supports. Second-stage interventions applied concurrently included opioids, antidepressants, anxiolytics, etc. Patients referred to this service were randomly assigned to the intervention or to a wait-list control group. Study measures were obtained at baseline and after the intervention. Interviews were done before randomization, at two weeks, and at five weeks. The interviews were recorded and transcribed verbatim for analysis. A final qualitative analysis was done from 20 intervention transcripts that were purposefully sampled to obtain a diverse group from those who improved and did not improve.
Randomized, controlled trial
Patients in the intervention group had greater reductions in breathlessness (1.68 versus 0.23 points, p = 0.049). There were no other significant differences in outcomes for patients or caregivers between study groups. Interventions identified as helpful were providing and teaching the use of a handheld fan, encouraging exercise, coaching in breathing techniques and positioning, medication changes, and referrals to other services. Total costs were lower for the intervention group, and a cost effectiveness analysis showed a 66.4% likelihood that the intervention would result in lower cost and better outcomes in terms of reduced distress from breathlessness. Scores for mastery of symptom management did not change significantly.
This complex psychoeducational and pharmacologic intervention was associated with reduced distress from breathlessness. No effects on patient or caregiver distress, anxiety, or depression were found.
Individual interventions such as opioid use have been shown to reduce dyspnea, so it was not possible to determine the relative value and utility of the combined interventions examined here. These study findings suggested that multicomponent, complex interventions to improve symptoms of breathlessness can be cost effective and improve outcomes.
Greer, J.A., MacDonald, J.J., Vaughn, J., Viscosi, E., Traeger, L., McDonnell, T., . . . Temel, J.S. (2015). Pilot study of a brief behavioral intervention for dyspnea in patients with advanced lung cancer. Journal of Pain and Symptom Management, 50, 854–860.
To determine the feasibility and usefulness of providing brief behavioral interventions to manage dyspnea in patients with advanced lung cancer
Participants received two 30-minute intervention sessions by the same nurse practioner, the second session provided within four weeks of the first. Two nurse practioners were trained in psychoeducation, behavioral techniques, and relaxation. The first session consisted of the nurse practioner explaining cognitive behavioral therapy and the effects of breathlessness, triggers, physiological factors, and behavioral responses on patients. Patients were taught pursed lip breathing, how to use a battery-operated fan, postural techniques, relaxation exercises, diaphragmatic breathing, and meditation. Participants were provided MP3 players with a recording of the guided breathing exercises to practice at home. The second intervention session consisted of reviewing and reinforcing the above instruction, answering questions, and identifying problems or obstacles.
Participants completed three measurements: the MMRCDS, the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Lung Trial Outcome Index (FACT-L TOI), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) at baseline and again postassessment (six weeks after enrollment). Also used was the enrollment rate/study completion rate to examine feasibility.
Fifty-seven patients were referred to the study with 32 patients enrolled. Four patients could not complete it and one withdrew, leaving 27 participants completing all study procedures (84%). First intervention sessions were provided in the infusion suite, and half of the second sessions were provided in the infusion suite and half over the phone. Participants reported reduction in dyspnea (MMRCDS) over time and improvement in quality of life (QOL) (FACT–L TOI) and depression (HADS), but no significant differences in anxiety. Results were unchanged for all outcomes when adjusting for primary and secondary analyses for the line of chemotherapy.
This study demonstrates the feasibility and possible benefit of providing brief behavioral interventions to patients with advanced lung cancer to decrease breathlessness, improve QOL, and decrease depression. The study showed that a potential barrier may be the availability of resources and time for staff in cancer centers to provide education and training to patients. With a small sample size and pre/post design, larger randomized controlled studies are needed to determine intervention effectiveness.
Dyspnea, which impairs QOL, is a common symptom in patients with advanced lung cancer. Oncology nurses are in unique position to assess dyspnea and how it relates to patient distress and overall QOL. Nurses trained in strategies and interventions to decrease dyspnea are also in a unique position to provide this education to their patients.
Hately, J., Laurence, V., Scott, A., Baker, R., & Thomas, P. (2003). Breathlessness clinics within specialist palliative care settings can improve the quality of life and functional capacity of patients with lung cancer. Palliative Medicine, 17(5), 410–417.
Potential patients were referred to a highly experienced palliative care physiotherapist clinic. Patients were seen by the physiotherapist at three sessions, each lasting as long as 90 minutes. Intervention consisted of breathing retraining, simple relaxation techniques, activity pacing, and psychosocial support.
The study reported on a sample of 30 patients with non-small cell lung cancer, small cell lung cancer, or mesothelioma (pleural effusion excluded) who experienced breathlessness not less than one month after completion of any active treatment; 68 patients were referred, 17 did not fulfill the criteria, 4 declined, and 2 were too ill to treat. Forty-five entered the study, and 15 deteriorated or died before completion. The median age was 71 years; 24 were men, and 6 were women.
The study was conducted in an outpatient clinic in the United Kingdom.
Tools completed by the therapist at each visit
Self-assessment tools completed by patients at baseline and following the intervention (four to six weeks)
Statistical analysis of baseline data on 12 patients who were unable to complete the study compared to 30 patients who completed the study showed significantly lower Functional Capacity Scale scores (p = 0.04) at first assessment. For patients who completed the study, a highly significant (p < 0.001) change in frequency of reported breathlessness was found. A decrease existed in reported breathlessness, from 97% reporting it at least once or twice a day, 73% several times a day, and 27% most of the time to 27% experiencing dyspnea several times a day and 3% most of the time at the final visit. A statistically significant change was seen between study entry and completion (p < 0.001) in functional capacity. Overall, 19 improved function, 9 remained stable, and 2 deteriorated.
No change in sputum production was found.
Rotterdam symptom checklist:
Significant changes were seen in the physical distress scores and activity levels (no p value given). Change in psychological distress scores were borderline.
Degree of breathlessness:
Significant improvement (p < 0.001) was found in all three parameters—breathing at best, breathing at worst, and distress caused by breathlessness.
Intervention strategies:
On study entry, patients were asked to score 20 strategies that were likely to improve feelings of breathlessness. Examples of interventions include activity pacing, abdominal breathing, slowing down, relaxation exercises, not worrying, accepting the situation, and positive thinking.
Patients reported that all of the techniques they learned were helpful and improved breathlessness. Patients reported that massage and the use of bronchodilator drugs were not helpful.
Quality of life:
Significant improvements were seen in decrease in time spent lying down (p = 0.02), improved bodily strength (p = 0.03), and increase in things that made patients happy (p = 0.04). Patients reported an increased ability to do things and improved quality of life.
Qualitative data:
The following themes were extracted from the narrative data: difficulty adjusting, issues around death, effects of treatments, and therapies’ impact on daily life.
The study was uncontrolled. A major limitation of the study is that it is a nonrandomized trial of referred patients. Impossible to know are the implied bias in patients who were referred or the true effect of the intervention without a control group. It was based on a prior study, with the time period shortened because of the loss of patients in the earlier study’s sample.
Higginson, I.J., Bausewein, C., Reilly, C.C., Gao, W., Gysels, M., Dzingina, M., . . . Moxham, J. (2014). An integrated palliative and respiratory care service for patients with advanced disease and refractory breathlessness: A randomised controlled trial. The Lancet. Respiratory Medicine, 2, 979–987.
To assess the effectiveness of a short-term breathlessness support service in facilitating breathlessness mastery in patients with advanced disease
This was a single-blinded, randomized, controlled trial. Research nurses and interviewers were blinded to the treatment allocation. Participants, the trial coordinator, and the trial administrator were aware of the treatment allocation.
An integrative approach to managing breathlessness within a support service improves patient mastery of breathlessness.
Additional research and education on the structure and process of an integrative breathlessness support service for patients with advanced cancer is warranted.
Johnson, M.J., Kanaan, M., Richardson, G., Nabb, S., Torgerson, D., English, A., . . . Booth, S. (2015). A randomised controlled trial of three or one breathing technique training sessions for breathlessness in people with malignant lung disease. BMC Medicine, 13, 213-015-0453-x.
To test whether three breathing training sessions are better than one in patients with intrathoracic malignancy experiencing breathlessness
Participants were randomized to receive either one or three hour sessions of training in four techniques (breathing control, pacing/prioritizing, relaxation, and anxiety management). Those randomized to three sessions had the sessions at intervals spaced one week apart. All participants received written and DVD/video reinforcement material and a telephone call from their therapist a week after the final session. The training was provided by the professional who would normally be responsible for completing such training at the given clinical site and included physiotherapists, occupational therapists, and a lung cancer clinical nurse specialists. At two sites, the professionals were described as being a part of a specialist palliative care breathlessness intervention service. Outcomes were measured at week 4 and compared to baseline.
No evidence exists that three sessions of breathing training for patients with intrathoracic malignancy with breathlessness were beneficial, and no increased distress and mastery over breathlessness occurred in those receiving three sessions over one. A single session of training is recommended if breathing training is used for breathlessness.
This study does not assess the effectiveness of breathing training over the standard of care for patients with cancer. If breathing training is considered based on other factors and other evidence, the nurse should be aware that this study does not support use of more than one session.
Yates, P., & Zhao, I. (2012). Update on complex nonpharmacological interventions for breathlessness. Current Opinion in Supportive and Palliative Care, 6(2), 144-152.
The objective of the article is to report on strategies that patients with breathlessness find helpful and provide a review of current evidence about the role of nonpharmacologic interventions in managing dypsnea.
This article reports a secondary analysis of data from a trial in which self-report items were used to assess the impact of dyspnea on daily activities, feelings about breathlessness, and strategies adopted by patients. Authors also review the findings of several systematic reviews of nonpharmacologic interventions for breathlessness involving patients with chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) as well as lung cancer.
The multi-site study was conducted in an unspecified setting in Australia.
Descriptive
About half of patients reported that breathlessness had some effect on feelings of panic, fear, and anger. Activity modification was the most frequently used strategy. Cognitive coping strategies were used by 80% of respondents. Other strategies included breathing exercises and environmental modifications. The most helpful strategies related to activity modification. Of those who used coping and breathing exercises, 60% said they were helpful. Breathing retraining was found to be effective but is mainly studied in COPD. Exercise program findings are inconclusive, and interventions to reduce anxiety have had some positive outcomes. Other interventions such as music, distraction, and complementary medicine have insufficient evidence.
Patients in this study reported that activity management was helpful to manage dyspnea.
Findings suggest that educating appropriate patients about activity management can be helpful for them to manage symptoms of dyspnea. Limited evidence exists about the effects of other nonpharmacologic approaches that are effective for patients with cancer.
Yorke, J., Lloyd-Williams, M., Smith, J., Blackhall, F., Harle, A., Warden, J., . . . & Molassiotis, A. (2015). Management of the respiratory distress symptom cluster in lung cancer: A randomised controlled feasibility trial. Supportive Care in Cancer, 23, 3373–3384.
To test the feasibility of a new nonpharmacologic intervention to manage the symptom cluster of respiratory distress including breathlessness, cough, and fatigue in patients with lung cancer
Participants received psychoeducational counseling, which consisted of controlled breathing techniques, cough-easing techniques, acupressure, and supplementary information. Participants attended two one-hour face-to-face teaching sessions, the second session given one week after the first, and then received a telephone call two weeks after the second session. The interventions were delivered by a complementary therapy team. The training for the team consisted of one three-hour face-to-face session and a follow-up refresher at the half point of the trial. Participants were asked to complete a daily diary for the first four weeks and then weekly until week 12. Participants were also asked to assess and document the usefulness of each core component or intervention; and to practice breathing and calming techniques twice a day, use education for identifying warning signs of a cough, use a modified swallow technique and relaxed throat breathing, apply pressure to identified acupressure points for one minute at least twice a day, and review information in an information packet.
Participants were randomized to either the control arm or intervention (RDSI) arm. Outcome assessments were collected at baseline, week 4, and week 12 at the end of the study. Breathlessness was measured using numerical rating scales and the dyspnea-12 scale, cough was assessed using the Manchester Cough in Lung Cancer scale (MCLC), and fatigue was assessed using Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy–Fatigue (FACIT-F). In addition, the EQ-5D-3L was used to describe the value of quality of life (QOL), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) was used to measure anxiety and depression.
Numerical rating scales were scored lowest for ease of use and relevance, and EQ-5D-3L was scored best for ease of use and relevance. Patients rated dyspnea-12 better for ease of completion and relevance, and EQ-5D-3L and HADS demonstrated a positive pattern in improvement for the intervention group. Participants reported a high adherence to interventions with breathing exercises and acupressure, and the lower use of cough-easing techniques was likely related to the lower number of participants bothered by cough in the intervention group. The majority of participants responded favorably to breathing exercises in responses, stating that it was useful at least a little bit, and cough and acupuncture responses also were favorable but had a higher number of responses saying that it was not useful at all. No significant difference existed in breathlessness between groups.
This study demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of nonpharmacologic interventions to manage symptoms of breathlessness, cough, and fatigue in patients with lung cancer. The study gave insight to the best tools/instruments to measure outcomes for larger trials that will determine improved patient outcomes with interventions. This study also revealed patients' willingness to learn new strategies and complete study requirements for data collection. The results trended better outcomes in the treatment group, but the trial was not large enough to draw conclusions.
Nurses play an important role in identifying and managing patients with the respiratory distress symptom cluster. The study suggests the potential role for nurses to educate patients or to refer patients to complementary practioners who will instruct them on breathing techniques, cough-easing techniques, and acupressure.
National Comprehensive Cancer Network. (2012). NCCN Clinical Practice Guidelines in Oncology: Palliative Care [v.2.2012]. Retrieved from http://www.nccn.org/professionals/physician_gls/pdf/palliative.pdf
The objective of the guidelines is to provide palliative care practice guidelines for patients with cancer, facilitating the appropriate integration of palliative care into oncology practice.
These are consensus-based guidelines.
Included in the guidelines are multiple phases of care with palliative care applications.
The NCCN made recommendations on the following symptoms.
Anorexia
Nutritional support, including enteral and parenteral feeding, should be considered. Appetite stimulants such as megestrol acetate and corticosteroids can be used when appetite is an important aspect of quality of life.
Chemotherapy-Induced Nausea and Vomiting (CINV)
Recommendations include prochlorperazine, haloperidol, metoclopramide, or benzodiazepines. Adding 5-HT3 receptor agonists, anticholinergics, antihistamines, corticosteroids, antipsychotics, and cannabinoids also can be considered. Palliative sedation can be considered as a last resort.
Constipation
Increase fluid intake, dietary fiber, and physical activity. Opioid-induced constipation should be anticipated and treated prophylactically with laxatives.
Dyspnea
Pharmacologic interventions include opioids or benzodiazapines. Scopolamine, atropine hyoscyamine, and glycopyrrolate are options to reduce excessive secretions.
Pain
Do not reduce opioid dose for symptoms such as decreased blood pressure or respiratory rate. Palliative sedation can be considered for refractory pain.
Sleep/Wake Disturbances
For refractory insomnia with no underlying physiologic cause, pharmacologic management includes diazepam, zolpidem, and sedating antidepressants. Cognitive behavioral therapy may be effective. If present, restless leg syndrome can be treated with ropinirole.
Recommendations provide expert opinion/consensus-level suggestions for management of various symptoms. Many recommendations, such as those for CINV, do not agree with current evidence in these areas.
Qaseem, A., Snow, V., Shekelle, P., Casey, D.E., Jr., Cross, J.T., Jr, Owens, D.K., . . . Shekelle, P. (2008). Evidence-based interventions to improve the palliative care of pain, dyspnea, and depression at the end of life: A clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians. Annals of Internal Medicine, 148, 141–146.
Objectives were to
Included were patients with any disabling or symptomatic condition at the end of life.
The guideline was based on a systematic evidence review, done by others, in an Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality evidence report. The guideline does not address nutritional support, complementary and alternative therapies, or spiritual support because evidence related to these areas does not often appear in the literature. Specific procedures for grading the evidence and recommendations are not described.
The guideline was developed for the Clinical Efficacy Assessment Subcommittee of the American College of Physicians. Evidence and recommendations were graded using the clinical practice guidelines grading system (GRADE).
Databases searched were MEDLINE and the Database of Abstract Reviews of Effects (January 1990–November 2005); citations from the review by the National Consensus Project for Quality Palliative Care (2003) also were searched.
Search keywords were cancer, congestive heart failure, and dementia. The full description of search terms is published elsewhere.
The guideline outlines the strength of GRADE recommendations and includes a brief description of the supporting evidence for each recommendation.
Critical Elements for End-of-Life Care: Elements identified are preventing and treating pain and other symptoms; supporting families and caregivers; ensuring continuity of care; ensuring respect for patients as people and informed decision making; ensuring well-being, including consideration of existential and spiritual concerns; and supporting function and duration of survival.
Identifying Patients Who Could Benefit From Palliation: No evidence tools have been validated or effectively shown to predict optimal timing. Decisions should be based on each patient's symptoms and preferences.
Treatment Strategies:
Important Elements for Advance Care Planning: Evidence shows that extensive multicomponent interventions, goal-oriented interviews with palliative care providers, and proactive communication involving skilled discussants can reduce unnecessary services, without causing harm, and increase the use of advance directives.
Collaboration and Consultation: Use and patient-centered outcomes improve when multidisciplinary teams include nurses and social services providers, address care coordination, and use facilitated communication.
Supporting Caregivers: Evidence regarding the effects of palliative care teams for caregivers is mixed.
The following were graded as strong recommendations with moderate quality of evidence.
The guideline provides clear guidance in several areas of end-of-life care and symptom management and identifies the relevant evidence and strength of the evidence. The guideline may not apply to all patients and is not intended to override clinical judgment. In addition to recommending medication interventions for depression, the guideline recommends psychosocial interventions.