神经性厌食症患者术后护理的数字增强:三角随机对照试验和经济评价。

IF 4 2区 医学 Q1 HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES
Janet Treasure, Katie Rowlands, Valentina Cardi, Suman Ambwani, David McDaid, Jodie Lord, Danielle Clark Bryan, Pamela Macdonald, Eva Bonin, Ulrike Schmidt, Jon Arcelus, Amy Harrison, Sabine Landau
{"title":"神经性厌食症患者术后护理的数字增强:三角随机对照试验和经济评价。","authors":"Janet Treasure, Katie Rowlands, Valentina Cardi, Suman Ambwani, David McDaid, Jodie Lord, Danielle Clark Bryan, Pamela Macdonald, Eva Bonin, Ulrike Schmidt, Jon Arcelus, Amy Harrison, Sabine Landau","doi":"10.3310/ADLS3672","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>High-risk patients with complex anorexia nervosa are managed in inpatient/day patient care, but re-admission rates are high, and new treatments are needed.</p><p><strong>Objective(s): </strong>To examine the effectiveness of a digital augmentation of aftercare (ECHOMANTRA).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Transition Care In Anorexia Nervosa through Guidance Online from Peer and Carer Expertise was a multicentre, parallel-group, superiority randomised controlled trial. ECHOMANTRA augmented treatment as usual was compared with treatment as usual. Patient-carer dyads were randomised using minimisation on a 1 : 1 ratio into ECHOMANTRA + treatment as usual (ECHOMANTRA) or treatment as usual alone.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Specialised United Kingdom inpatient/day patient sites (<i>n</i> = 31) participated.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Patient-carer dyads were randomised (<i>n</i> = 185 in ECHOMANTRA and <i>n</i> = 186 in treatment as usual).</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>The digital ECHOMANTRA intervention included self-management tools (recovery tips videos) for patients and task-sharing materials for carers (skill-sharing video), supplemented with guided group chat sessions. All participants randomised to ECHOMANTRA + treatment as usual had access to the psychoeducational materials and joint patient/carer chat sessions were also offered.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome was patient distress at 12 months. Other outcomes included patient distress at 18 months, and eating disorder symptoms, social and work adjustment, and carer distress and skills at 12 and 18 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no evidence of an intervention effect on the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21 outcome for patients (<i>n</i> = 370) at 12 months, estimated effect 0.48, 95% confidence interval -0.20 to 0.23, standardised estimate (0.02, <i>p</i> = 0.87). In the economic analysis, the intervention was dominated by treatment as usual from both a health system and wider societal perspective, as ECHOMANTRA cost more and resulted in fewer quality-adjusted life-years gained. However, the uptake of the interactive component of the intervention (i.e. the facilitated and moderated online groups) was limited, with only 20% of the dyad members attending the pre-set minimal adherence level (i.e. both the patient and carer attending at least four online forum group sessions). The feedback about the intervention was predominantly positive. For example, the group facilitators were rated highly. However, some feedback was that the intervention offered too little, too late, and that a more personalised intervention would be more helpful.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Participants were diverse (e.g. 20% were being treated under the Mental Health Act), and a large proportion had a range of comorbidities (depression, anxiety, obsessive-compulsive disorder and autistic spectrum disorders), all factors impacting prognosis. Although efforts were made to enhance inclusion, diversity in terms of gender, sexuality and race was limited, and technological barriers and/or lack of a carer may have led to exclusion. The high level of non-adherence to the group support (80% dyads) may have contributed to the non-significant findings.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This guided self-management and task-sharing intervention was reviewed positively by some patients and supporters; however, there was no evidence that the intervention improved outcomes over usual aftercare.</p><p><strong>Future work: </strong>Identifying mechanisms to increase engagement such as a more personalised approach to aftercare to address the diverse needs of this patient group are needed. Greater integration between intensive and step-down services with guidance from peer workers providing support may optimise care.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This trial is registered as ISRCTN14644379.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 14/68/09) and is published in full in <i>Health Technology Assessment</i>; Vol. 29, No. 31. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.</p>","PeriodicalId":12898,"journal":{"name":"Health technology assessment","volume":"29 31","pages":"1-162"},"PeriodicalIF":4.0000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12336943/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Digital augmentation of aftercare for patients with anorexia nervosa: the TRIANGLE RCT and economic evaluation.\",\"authors\":\"Janet Treasure, Katie Rowlands, Valentina Cardi, Suman Ambwani, David McDaid, Jodie Lord, Danielle Clark Bryan, Pamela Macdonald, Eva Bonin, Ulrike Schmidt, Jon Arcelus, Amy Harrison, Sabine Landau\",\"doi\":\"10.3310/ADLS3672\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>High-risk patients with complex anorexia nervosa are managed in inpatient/day patient care, but re-admission rates are high, and new treatments are needed.</p><p><strong>Objective(s): </strong>To examine the effectiveness of a digital augmentation of aftercare (ECHOMANTRA).</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>Transition Care In Anorexia Nervosa through Guidance Online from Peer and Carer Expertise was a multicentre, parallel-group, superiority randomised controlled trial. ECHOMANTRA augmented treatment as usual was compared with treatment as usual. Patient-carer dyads were randomised using minimisation on a 1 : 1 ratio into ECHOMANTRA + treatment as usual (ECHOMANTRA) or treatment as usual alone.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>Specialised United Kingdom inpatient/day patient sites (<i>n</i> = 31) participated.</p><p><strong>Participants: </strong>Patient-carer dyads were randomised (<i>n</i> = 185 in ECHOMANTRA and <i>n</i> = 186 in treatment as usual).</p><p><strong>Interventions: </strong>The digital ECHOMANTRA intervention included self-management tools (recovery tips videos) for patients and task-sharing materials for carers (skill-sharing video), supplemented with guided group chat sessions. All participants randomised to ECHOMANTRA + treatment as usual had access to the psychoeducational materials and joint patient/carer chat sessions were also offered.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome was patient distress at 12 months. Other outcomes included patient distress at 18 months, and eating disorder symptoms, social and work adjustment, and carer distress and skills at 12 and 18 months.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no evidence of an intervention effect on the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21 outcome for patients (<i>n</i> = 370) at 12 months, estimated effect 0.48, 95% confidence interval -0.20 to 0.23, standardised estimate (0.02, <i>p</i> = 0.87). In the economic analysis, the intervention was dominated by treatment as usual from both a health system and wider societal perspective, as ECHOMANTRA cost more and resulted in fewer quality-adjusted life-years gained. However, the uptake of the interactive component of the intervention (i.e. the facilitated and moderated online groups) was limited, with only 20% of the dyad members attending the pre-set minimal adherence level (i.e. both the patient and carer attending at least four online forum group sessions). The feedback about the intervention was predominantly positive. For example, the group facilitators were rated highly. However, some feedback was that the intervention offered too little, too late, and that a more personalised intervention would be more helpful.</p><p><strong>Limitations: </strong>Participants were diverse (e.g. 20% were being treated under the Mental Health Act), and a large proportion had a range of comorbidities (depression, anxiety, obsessive-compulsive disorder and autistic spectrum disorders), all factors impacting prognosis. Although efforts were made to enhance inclusion, diversity in terms of gender, sexuality and race was limited, and technological barriers and/or lack of a carer may have led to exclusion. The high level of non-adherence to the group support (80% dyads) may have contributed to the non-significant findings.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This guided self-management and task-sharing intervention was reviewed positively by some patients and supporters; however, there was no evidence that the intervention improved outcomes over usual aftercare.</p><p><strong>Future work: </strong>Identifying mechanisms to increase engagement such as a more personalised approach to aftercare to address the diverse needs of this patient group are needed. Greater integration between intensive and step-down services with guidance from peer workers providing support may optimise care.</p><p><strong>Trial registration: </strong>This trial is registered as ISRCTN14644379.</p><p><strong>Funding: </strong>This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 14/68/09) and is published in full in <i>Health Technology Assessment</i>; Vol. 29, No. 31. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":12898,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Health technology assessment\",\"volume\":\"29 31\",\"pages\":\"1-162\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12336943/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Health technology assessment\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3310/ADLS3672\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Health technology assessment","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3310/ADLS3672","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"HEALTH CARE SCIENCES & SERVICES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:复杂神经性厌食症的高危患者在住院/日间护理中得到管理,但再入院率高,需要新的治疗方法。目的:探讨数字化增强术后护理(ECHOMANTRA)的有效性。设计:通过同伴在线指导和护理人员专业知识对神经性厌食症进行过渡护理是一项多中心、平行组、优势随机对照试验。常规ECHOMANTRA强化治疗与常规治疗比较。按照1:1的比例将患者-护理人员随机分为ECHOMANTRA +常规治疗(ECHOMANTRA)或单独常规治疗。环境:参与了英国专门的住院/日间病人中心(n = 31)。参与者:患者-护理者二人组随机分组(ECHOMANTRA组n = 185,常规治疗组n = 186)。干预措施:数字ECHOMANTRA干预措施包括患者的自我管理工具(康复提示视频)和护理人员的任务分享材料(技能分享视频),并辅以指导小组聊天会议。所有随机接受ECHOMANTRA +治疗的参与者都可以获得心理教育材料,并提供患者/护理人员联合聊天会议。主要观察指标:主要观察指标为患者12个月时的痛苦程度。其他结果包括患者在18个月时的痛苦,饮食失调症状,社会和工作适应,以及护理人员在12个月和18个月时的痛苦和技能。结果:没有证据表明干预对患者(n = 370) 12个月时的抑郁焦虑应激量表-21结局有影响,估计效果为0.48,95%置信区间为-0.20 ~ 0.23,标准化估计(0.02,p = 0.87)。在经济分析中,从卫生系统和更广泛的社会角度来看,干预措施主要是常规治疗,因为ECHOMANTRA成本更高,结果获得的质量调整生命年更少。然而,干预的互动部分(即促进和缓和的在线小组)的吸收是有限的,只有20%的双成员参加预先设定的最低遵守水平(即患者和护理人员参加至少四个在线论坛小组会议)。对干预的反馈主要是积极的。例如,小组引导者的评价很高。然而,一些反馈是,干预提供太少,太迟,更个性化的干预将更有帮助。局限性:参与者是多种多样的(例如,20%的参与者根据《精神卫生法》接受治疗),很大一部分患者有一系列合并症(抑郁、焦虑、强迫症和自闭症谱系障碍),所有这些因素都会影响预后。虽然为加强包容性作出了努力,但性别、性向和种族方面的多样性是有限的,技术障碍和/或缺乏照顾者可能导致排斥。对团体支持的高度不依从性(80%对)可能是导致非显著结果的原因。结论:这种指导性自我管理和任务分担干预得到了一些患者和支持者的积极评价;然而,没有证据表明干预比常规的术后护理改善了结果。未来的工作:确定增加参与的机制,如更个性化的护理方法,以满足这一患者群体的不同需求。在提供支持的同行工作者的指导下,强化服务和逐步服务之间的更大整合可能会优化护理。试验注册:该试验注册号为ISRCTN14644379。资助:该奖项由美国国家卫生与保健研究所(NIHR)卫生技术评估项目(NIHR奖励编号:14/68/09)资助,全文发表在《卫生技术评估》杂志上;第29卷,第31号有关进一步的奖励信息,请参阅美国国立卫生研究院资助和奖励网站。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Digital augmentation of aftercare for patients with anorexia nervosa: the TRIANGLE RCT and economic evaluation.

Background: High-risk patients with complex anorexia nervosa are managed in inpatient/day patient care, but re-admission rates are high, and new treatments are needed.

Objective(s): To examine the effectiveness of a digital augmentation of aftercare (ECHOMANTRA).

Design: Transition Care In Anorexia Nervosa through Guidance Online from Peer and Carer Expertise was a multicentre, parallel-group, superiority randomised controlled trial. ECHOMANTRA augmented treatment as usual was compared with treatment as usual. Patient-carer dyads were randomised using minimisation on a 1 : 1 ratio into ECHOMANTRA + treatment as usual (ECHOMANTRA) or treatment as usual alone.

Setting: Specialised United Kingdom inpatient/day patient sites (n = 31) participated.

Participants: Patient-carer dyads were randomised (n = 185 in ECHOMANTRA and n = 186 in treatment as usual).

Interventions: The digital ECHOMANTRA intervention included self-management tools (recovery tips videos) for patients and task-sharing materials for carers (skill-sharing video), supplemented with guided group chat sessions. All participants randomised to ECHOMANTRA + treatment as usual had access to the psychoeducational materials and joint patient/carer chat sessions were also offered.

Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was patient distress at 12 months. Other outcomes included patient distress at 18 months, and eating disorder symptoms, social and work adjustment, and carer distress and skills at 12 and 18 months.

Results: There was no evidence of an intervention effect on the Depression Anxiety Stress Scale-21 outcome for patients (n = 370) at 12 months, estimated effect 0.48, 95% confidence interval -0.20 to 0.23, standardised estimate (0.02, p = 0.87). In the economic analysis, the intervention was dominated by treatment as usual from both a health system and wider societal perspective, as ECHOMANTRA cost more and resulted in fewer quality-adjusted life-years gained. However, the uptake of the interactive component of the intervention (i.e. the facilitated and moderated online groups) was limited, with only 20% of the dyad members attending the pre-set minimal adherence level (i.e. both the patient and carer attending at least four online forum group sessions). The feedback about the intervention was predominantly positive. For example, the group facilitators were rated highly. However, some feedback was that the intervention offered too little, too late, and that a more personalised intervention would be more helpful.

Limitations: Participants were diverse (e.g. 20% were being treated under the Mental Health Act), and a large proportion had a range of comorbidities (depression, anxiety, obsessive-compulsive disorder and autistic spectrum disorders), all factors impacting prognosis. Although efforts were made to enhance inclusion, diversity in terms of gender, sexuality and race was limited, and technological barriers and/or lack of a carer may have led to exclusion. The high level of non-adherence to the group support (80% dyads) may have contributed to the non-significant findings.

Conclusions: This guided self-management and task-sharing intervention was reviewed positively by some patients and supporters; however, there was no evidence that the intervention improved outcomes over usual aftercare.

Future work: Identifying mechanisms to increase engagement such as a more personalised approach to aftercare to address the diverse needs of this patient group are needed. Greater integration between intensive and step-down services with guidance from peer workers providing support may optimise care.

Trial registration: This trial is registered as ISRCTN14644379.

Funding: This award was funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health Technology Assessment programme (NIHR award ref: 14/68/09) and is published in full in Health Technology Assessment; Vol. 29, No. 31. See the NIHR Funding and Awards website for further award information.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Health technology assessment
Health technology assessment 医学-卫生保健
CiteScore
6.90
自引率
0.00%
发文量
94
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Health Technology Assessment (HTA) publishes research information on the effectiveness, costs and broader impact of health technologies for those who use, manage and provide care in the NHS.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信