A cluster randomised trial of a Needs Assessment Tool for adult Cancer patients and their carers (NAT-C) in primary care: A feasibility study.
Clark, J
Amoakwa, E
Wright-Hughes, A
Blenkinsopp, J
Currow, DC
Meads, D
Farrin, A
Allgar, V
Macleod, U
Johnson, M
- Publisher:
- PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE
- Publication Type:
- Journal Article
- Citation:
- PloS one, 2021, 16, (1)
- Issue Date:
- 2021-01-28
Open Access
Copyright Clearance Process
- Recently Added
- In Progress
- Open Access
This item is open access.
Full metadata record
Field | Value | Language |
---|---|---|
dc.contributor.author | Clark, J | |
dc.contributor.author | Amoakwa, E | |
dc.contributor.author | Wright-Hughes, A | |
dc.contributor.author | Blenkinsopp, J | |
dc.contributor.author | Currow, DC | |
dc.contributor.author | Meads, D | |
dc.contributor.author | Farrin, A | |
dc.contributor.author | Allgar, V | |
dc.contributor.author | Macleod, U | |
dc.contributor.author | Johnson, M | |
dc.date.accessioned | 2021-09-03T03:55:25Z | |
dc.date.available | 2021-01-05 | |
dc.date.available | 2021-09-03T03:55:25Z | |
dc.date.issued | 2021-01-28 | |
dc.identifier.citation | PloS one, 2021, 16, (1) | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1932-6203 | |
dc.identifier.issn | 1932-6203 | |
dc.identifier.uri | http://hdl.handle.net/10453/150309 | |
dc.description.abstract | <h4>Background</h4>People with cancer often have unidentified symptoms and social care needs. The Needs Assessment Tool-Cancer (NAT-C) is a validated, structured method of assessing patient/carer concerns and prompting action, to address unmet need.<h4>Aims</h4>Assess feasibility and acceptability of a definitive two-armed cluster randomised trial of NAT-C in primary care by evaluating: recruitment of GP practices, patients and carers; most effective approach of ensuring NAT-C appointments, acceptability of study measures and follow-up.<h4>Methods</h4>Non-blinded, feasibility study in four General Practices, with cluster randomisation to method of NAT-C appointment delivery, and process evaluation. Adults with active cancer were invited to participate with or without carer. Practices cluster randomised (1:1) to Arm I: promotion and use of NAT-C with a NAT-C trained clinician or Arm II: clinician of choice irrespective of training status. Participants completed study questionnaires at: baseline, 1, 3 and 6 months. Patients booked a 20 minute needs-assessment appointment post-baseline. Patients, carers and GP practice staff views regarding the study sought through interviews/focus groups. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively. Qualitative data were analysed thematically, informed by Normalisation Process Theory. Progression to a definitive trial was assessed against feasibility outcomes, relating to: recruitment rate, uptake and delivery of the NAT-C, data collection and quality.<h4>Results</h4>Five GP practices approached, four recruited and trained to use the NAT-C. Forty-seven participants and 17 carers recruited. At baseline, 34/47 (72%) participants reported at least one moderate-severe unmet need, confirming study rationale. 32/47 (68%) participants received a NAT-C-guided consultation, 19 of which on Arm I. Study attrition at one month (n = 44 (94%), n = 16 (94%)), three months (n = 38 (81%), n = 14 (82%)) and six months (n = 32 (68%), n = 10 (59%)). Fifteen patient interviews conducted across the whole study and one focus group at each GP practice. Participants supported a definitive study and found measures acceptable.<h4>Conclusion</h4>The feasibility trial indicated that recruitment rate, intervention uptake and data collection were appropriate, with refinements, for a definitive multi-centre cluster randomised controlled trial. Feasibility outcomes informed the design of a 2-armed cluster randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the NAT-C compared with usual care. | |
dc.format | Electronic-eCollection | |
dc.language | eng | |
dc.publisher | PUBLIC LIBRARY SCIENCE | |
dc.relation.ispartof | PloS one | |
dc.relation.isbasedon | 10.1371/journal.pone.0245647 | |
dc.rights | info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess | |
dc.subject.classification | General Science & Technology | |
dc.subject.mesh | Aged | |
dc.subject.mesh | Aged, 80 and over | |
dc.subject.mesh | Caregivers | |
dc.subject.mesh | Feasibility Studies | |
dc.subject.mesh | Female | |
dc.subject.mesh | Humans | |
dc.subject.mesh | Male | |
dc.subject.mesh | Middle Aged | |
dc.subject.mesh | Needs Assessment | |
dc.subject.mesh | Neoplasms | |
dc.subject.mesh | Primary Health Care | |
dc.subject.mesh | Quality of Life | |
dc.subject.mesh | Humans | |
dc.subject.mesh | Neoplasms | |
dc.subject.mesh | Feasibility Studies | |
dc.subject.mesh | Quality of Life | |
dc.subject.mesh | Needs Assessment | |
dc.subject.mesh | Aged | |
dc.subject.mesh | Aged, 80 and over | |
dc.subject.mesh | Middle Aged | |
dc.subject.mesh | Caregivers | |
dc.subject.mesh | Primary Health Care | |
dc.subject.mesh | Female | |
dc.subject.mesh | Male | |
dc.subject.mesh | Aged | |
dc.subject.mesh | Aged, 80 and over | |
dc.subject.mesh | Caregivers | |
dc.subject.mesh | Feasibility Studies | |
dc.subject.mesh | Female | |
dc.subject.mesh | Humans | |
dc.subject.mesh | Male | |
dc.subject.mesh | Middle Aged | |
dc.subject.mesh | Needs Assessment | |
dc.subject.mesh | Neoplasms | |
dc.subject.mesh | Primary Health Care | |
dc.subject.mesh | Quality of Life | |
dc.title | A cluster randomised trial of a Needs Assessment Tool for adult Cancer patients and their carers (NAT-C) in primary care: A feasibility study. | |
dc.type | Journal Article | |
utslib.citation.volume | 16 | |
utslib.location.activity | United States | |
pubs.organisational-group | /University of Technology Sydney | |
pubs.organisational-group | /University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health | |
pubs.organisational-group | /University of Technology Sydney/Faculty of Health/IMPACCT | |
utslib.copyright.status | open_access | * |
pubs.consider-herdc | false | |
dc.date.updated | 2021-09-03T03:55:22Z | |
pubs.issue | 1 | |
pubs.publication-status | Published | |
pubs.volume | 16 | |
utslib.citation.issue | 1 |
Abstract:
Background
People with cancer often have unidentified symptoms and social care needs. The Needs Assessment Tool-Cancer (NAT-C) is a validated, structured method of assessing patient/carer concerns and prompting action, to address unmet need.Aims
Assess feasibility and acceptability of a definitive two-armed cluster randomised trial of NAT-C in primary care by evaluating: recruitment of GP practices, patients and carers; most effective approach of ensuring NAT-C appointments, acceptability of study measures and follow-up.Methods
Non-blinded, feasibility study in four General Practices, with cluster randomisation to method of NAT-C appointment delivery, and process evaluation. Adults with active cancer were invited to participate with or without carer. Practices cluster randomised (1:1) to Arm I: promotion and use of NAT-C with a NAT-C trained clinician or Arm II: clinician of choice irrespective of training status. Participants completed study questionnaires at: baseline, 1, 3 and 6 months. Patients booked a 20 minute needs-assessment appointment post-baseline. Patients, carers and GP practice staff views regarding the study sought through interviews/focus groups. Quantitative data were analysed descriptively. Qualitative data were analysed thematically, informed by Normalisation Process Theory. Progression to a definitive trial was assessed against feasibility outcomes, relating to: recruitment rate, uptake and delivery of the NAT-C, data collection and quality.Results
Five GP practices approached, four recruited and trained to use the NAT-C. Forty-seven participants and 17 carers recruited. At baseline, 34/47 (72%) participants reported at least one moderate-severe unmet need, confirming study rationale. 32/47 (68%) participants received a NAT-C-guided consultation, 19 of which on Arm I. Study attrition at one month (n = 44 (94%), n = 16 (94%)), three months (n = 38 (81%), n = 14 (82%)) and six months (n = 32 (68%), n = 10 (59%)). Fifteen patient interviews conducted across the whole study and one focus group at each GP practice. Participants supported a definitive study and found measures acceptable.Conclusion
The feasibility trial indicated that recruitment rate, intervention uptake and data collection were appropriate, with refinements, for a definitive multi-centre cluster randomised controlled trial. Feasibility outcomes informed the design of a 2-armed cluster randomised controlled trial to test the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of the NAT-C compared with usual care.Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Download statistics for the last 12 months
Not enough data to produce graph