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.