Abstract
In cancer patients, physical and psychological issues are very common. There is a need for family support and high utilisation of healthcare resources commonly. Palliative care (PC) has grown in popularity to better fulfil of needs of patients and their families and potentially lowering hospital costs. Given that the majority of patients still die in hospitals, there is a need for an effective model of PC for advanced gynaecological cancer, as well as the wise allocation of scarce resources. The main aim of this study was to compare the efficacy of PC to conventional treatment for adults with cancer, including gynaecological cancers, and their caregivers. Four randomised controlled trials (RCTs) were identified by searching PubMed, PubMed Central, Clinical Key, Embase and other grey literature from a duration of 2011–2021. Cochrane criteria were used to calculate the risk of bias, and the Grade Profiler Guideline Development Tool was used to check the quality of the included studies. Standardised mean differences (SMDs), I2 value and forest plot were prepared by using Review Manager 4.0. A total of four RCTs were extracted by following Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines and found to have a high risk for bias and low to poor quality of evidence. Included study sample sizes ranged from 22 to 104 participants, including 670 people in total, including 289 patients with advanced cancer patients, including gynaecological cancer and 381 unpaid caregivers. Results also showed that PC enhances patients’ quality of life (SMD = 0.26; 95% confidence interval [CI] = −0.29–0.80; I2 = 76%), lowered symptom burden amongst patients (SMD = −0.75, 95% CI = −1.75–0.25; I2 = 89%), reduces patient depression (SMD = 0.08, 95% CI = −0.19–0.34; I2 = 0%) and decreases depression in unpaid caregivers (SMD = −0.16, 95% CI = −0.56–0.24; I2 = 59%). PC treatment increases patients’ quality of life and lowers their symptom burden. In comparison to conventional care, it also reduces depression among patients and caregivers. We believe that the findings should be viewed with care until more recent exclusive RCTs are available.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callSimilar Papers
Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
