Skip to main content
. 2013 Jun 6;2013(6):CD007760. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD007760.pub2

31. Cognitive status: home palliative care versus usual care.

Study Measure Analysis Follow‐up Significance and direction Details
Hughes 1992
US
Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire (10 items)
score: from 0 to 10; scale recoded so that higher score equal better cognitive functioning; patient report
Forwards from enrolment 1 month n.s.
Beta 0.12
t 0.32
P value = 0.75
ANCOVA (age, education, race, marital status, retirement due to health, prior private sector hospital use, living arrangement, and baseline care satisfaction scores; none of these factors were predictive of outcomes); descriptive data not provided
6 months n.s.
t < 1
Intervention (n = 17): M 8.33
Control (n = 14): M 8.86
 
Data were analysed using t‐tests because the sample did not support regression models
Greer 1986
(CBA)
Item on patient awareness
score: from 1 to 4; higher scores equal greater awareness; caregiver report 
 
Backwards from death 3 weeks Authors stated there were no differences but statistical significance was not stated
"patient awareness was comparable in the three groups" (Greer 1986)
Adjusted estimatesa
Community‐based intervention: M 1.88 (SE 0.05)
Hospital‐based intervention: M 1.84 (SE 0.06)
Control: M 1.84 (SE 0.08)
1 week Adjusted estimatesa
Community‐based intervention: M 2.28 (SE 0.05)
Hospital‐based intervention: M 2.18 (SE 0.05)
Control: M 2.23 (SE 0.09)

ANCOVA: analysis of covariance; CBA: controlled before and after study; M: mean; n.s.: non‐significant; SE: standard error.

aEstimates adjusted for sample differences; standard errors based on the linear regression equation.