Cited by 32Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis ResearchNursing care and researchDementia and Cognitive Impairment Research

Cluster RCT of case management on patients' quality of life and caregiver strain in ALS

Creemers, Huub, Veldink, Jan H., Grupstra, Hepke, Nollet, Frans, Beelen, Anita, van den Berg, Leonard H.·2014·Neurology

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To study the effect of case management on quality of life, caregiver strain, and perceived quality of care (QOC) in patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis (ALS) and their caregivers. METHODS: We conducted a multicenter cluster randomized controlled trial with the multidisciplinary ALS care team as the unit of randomization. During 12 months, patients with ALS and their caregivers received case management plus usual care or usual care alone. Outcome measures were the 40-item ALS Assessment Questionnaire (ALSAQ-40), Emotional Functioning domain (EF); the Caregiver Strain Index (CSI); and the QOC score. These measures were assessed at baseline and at 4, 8, and 12 months. RESULTS: Case management resulted in no changes in ALSAQ-40 EF, CSI, or QOC from baseline to 12 months. ALSAQ-40 EF scores in both groups were similar at baseline and did not change over time (p = 0.331). CSI scores in both groups increased significantly (p < 0.0001). Patients with ALS from both groups rated their perceived QOC at baseline with a median score of 8, which did not change significantly during follow-up. CONCLUSION: Within the context of multidisciplinary ALS care teams, case management appears to confer no benefit for patients with ALS or their caregivers. CLASSIFICATION OF EVIDENCE: This study provides Class III evidence that case management in addition to multidisciplinary ALS care does not significantly improve health-related quality of life of patients with ALS.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1212/01.wnl.0000438227.48470.62

Cites

40 of 40 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Creemers, H., Veldink, J. H., Grupstra, H., Nollet, F., Beelen, A., & van den Berg, L. H.
Affiliations
  • Amsterdam UMC Location University of Amsterdam (NL)
  • From the Department of Rehabilitation (H.C., H.G., F.N., A.B.), Academic Medical Center Amsterdam, Netherlands ALS Center; and Department of Neurology (J.H.V., L.H.v.d.B.), Rudolf Magnus Institute of Neuroscience, Netherlands ALS Center, Utrecht.
Venue
Neurology
Published
2014-01-07
Volume
82
Issue
1
Pages
23-31
ISSN
  • 0028-3878 (ISSN-L)
  • 1526-632X
OpenAlex
W2020948737
Cited by
32
References
40
Citations by year
2026: 1 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 1 · 2020: 2 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 1 · 2017: 4 · 2016: 2 · 2015: 6 · 2014: 2
FWCI
2.12
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neurology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Data Archiving and Networked Services (DANS) (submittedVersion)
  • Pure Amsterdam UMC (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Neurology › Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis Research
  • Health Sciences › Health Professions › Pharmacy › Nursing care and research
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Psychiatry and Mental health › Dementia and Cognitive Impairment Research
Keywords
amyotrophic lateral sclerosis, case management, caregiver burden, health-related quality of life, perceived quality of care, multidisciplinary team, Caregiver Strain Index, emotional functioning
MeSH terms
Aged, Amyotrophic Lateral Sclerosis, Female, Follow-Up Studies, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Cluster Analysis, Caregivers, Case Management

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review