↓ Skip to main content

A novel Family Dignity Intervention (FDI) for enhancing and informing holistic palliative care in Asia: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Overview of attention for article published in Trials, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
4 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
34 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
275 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
A novel Family Dignity Intervention (FDI) for enhancing and informing holistic palliative care in Asia: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Published in
Trials, December 2017
DOI 10.1186/s13063-017-2325-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Andy Hau Yan Ho, Josip Car, Moon-Ho Ringo Ho, Geraldine Tan-Ho, Ping Ying Choo, Paul Victor Patinadan, Poh Heng Chong, Wah Ying Ong, Gilbert Fan, Yee Pin Tan, Robert A. Neimeyer, Harvey M. Chochinov

Abstract

The lack of a holistic approach to palliative care can lead to a fractured sense of dignity at the end of life, resulting in depression, hopelessness, feelings of being a burden to others, and the loss of the will to live among terminally ill patients. Building on the clinical foundation of Dignity Therapy, together with the empirical understanding of dignity-related concerns of Asian families facing terminal illness, a novel Family Dignity Intervention (FDI) has been developed for Asian palliative care. FDI comprises a recorded interview with a patient and their primary family caregiver, which is transcribed, edited into a legacy document, and returned to the dyads for sharing with the rest of the patient's family. The aims of this study are to assess the feasibility, acceptability and potential effectiveness of FDI in reducing psychosocial, emotional, spiritual, and psychophysiological distress in community-dwelling and in-patient, Asian, older terminally ill patients and their families living in Singapore. An open-label randomized controlled trial. One hundred and twenty-six patient-family dyads are randomly allocated to one of two groups: (1) an intervention group (FDI offered in addition to standard psychological care) and (2) a control group (standard psychological care). Both quantitative and qualitative outcomes are assessed in face-to-face interviews at baseline, 3 days and 2 weeks after intervention, as well as during an exit interview with family caregivers at 2 months post bereavement. Primary outcome measures include sense of dignity for patients and psychological distress for caregivers. Secondary outcomes include meaning in life, quality of life, spirituality, hopefulness, perceived support, and psychophysiological wellbeing, as well as bereavement outcomes for caregivers. Qualitative data are analyzed using the Framework method. To date, there is no available palliative care intervention for dignity enhancement in Asia. This first-of-its-kind study develops and tests an evidence-based, family driven, psycho-socio-spiritual intervention for enhancing dignity and wellbeing among Asian patients and families facing mortality. It addresses a critical gap in the provision of holistic palliative care. The expected outcomes will contribute to advancements in both theories and practices of palliative care for Singapore and its neighboring regions while serving to inform similar developments in other Asian communities. ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT03200730 . Registered on 26 June 2017.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 275 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 275 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 31 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 28 10%
Student > Master 27 10%
Researcher 20 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 20 7%
Other 39 14%
Unknown 110 40%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 46 17%
Psychology 40 15%
Medicine and Dentistry 33 12%
Social Sciences 11 4%
Unspecified 7 3%
Other 22 8%
Unknown 116 42%