Improving Benefit and Reducing Burden of Informal Caregiving for Patients With Heart Failure: A Mixed Methods Study.

IF 1.7 4区医学 Q3 CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS

Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing Pub Date : 2024-09-27 DOI:10.1097/JCN.0000000000001137

Katherine Doyon, Kelsey Flint, Karen Albright, David Bekelman

{"title":"Improving Benefit and Reducing Burden of Informal Caregiving for Patients With Heart Failure: A Mixed Methods Study.","authors":"Katherine Doyon, Kelsey Flint, Karen Albright, David Bekelman","doi":"10.1097/JCN.0000000000001137","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Few randomized clinical trials test the effect of interventions on heart failure caregiver well-being.Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the effect of a patient-focused symptom and psychosocial collaborative care intervention (Collaborative Care to Alleviate Symptoms and Adjust to Illness) on heart failure caregiver depression, burden, and benefit-finding.Methods: A sequential explanatory mixed-method design was used in the context of a multisite, randomized clinical trial. Self-reported caregiver depression, burden, and benefit-finding were assessed at baseline and 12 months. Thematic analysis was conducted on social worker documentation of a psychosocial intervention with caregivers.Results: One hundred one caregivers were randomized to usual care or Collaborative Care to Alleviate Symptoms and Adjust to Illness. There were no significant differences in caregiver depression, burden, or benefit-finding between usual care and Collaborative Care to Alleviate Symptoms and Adjust to Illness. Caregiver outcomes were discussed in 42% of intervention notes, highlighting varied and complex caregiver experiences. Inductive analysis reaffirmed the complexity and range of caregiver needs and experiences.Conclusion: A patient symptom/psychosocial intervention did not impact caregiver well-being. Interventions should target specific needs of caregivers.","PeriodicalId":54868,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/JCN.0000000000001137","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"CARDIAC & CARDIOVASCULAR SYSTEMS","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Few randomized clinical trials test the effect of interventions on heart failure caregiver well-being.

Objective: The aim of this study was to determine the effect of a patient-focused symptom and psychosocial collaborative care intervention (Collaborative Care to Alleviate Symptoms and Adjust to Illness) on heart failure caregiver depression, burden, and benefit-finding.

Methods: A sequential explanatory mixed-method design was used in the context of a multisite, randomized clinical trial. Self-reported caregiver depression, burden, and benefit-finding were assessed at baseline and 12 months. Thematic analysis was conducted on social worker documentation of a psychosocial intervention with caregivers.

Results: One hundred one caregivers were randomized to usual care or Collaborative Care to Alleviate Symptoms and Adjust to Illness. There were no significant differences in caregiver depression, burden, or benefit-finding between usual care and Collaborative Care to Alleviate Symptoms and Adjust to Illness. Caregiver outcomes were discussed in 42% of intervention notes, highlighting varied and complex caregiver experiences. Inductive analysis reaffirmed the complexity and range of caregiver needs and experiences.

Conclusion: A patient symptom/psychosocial intervention did not impact caregiver well-being. Interventions should target specific needs of caregivers.

查看原文本刊更多论文

改善心力衰竭患者非正规护理的益处并减轻其负担：混合方法研究

背景：很少有随机临床试验检验干预措施对心力衰竭护理人员幸福感的影响：很少有随机临床试验检验干预措施对心力衰竭护理人员福祉的影响：本研究旨在确定以患者为中心的症状和社会心理协作护理干预（减轻症状和适应疾病的协作护理）对心衰护理者抑郁、负担和获益的影响：方法：在多地点随机临床试验的背景下，采用顺序解释混合方法设计。在基线和 12 个月时对护理人员自我报告的抑郁、负担和获益情况进行了评估。对社工对护理人员进行心理干预的记录进行了主题分析：100 名护理人员随机接受了常规护理或减轻症状和适应疾病的合作护理。在照护者抑郁、负担或受益发现方面，常规照护与减轻症状和适应疾病的协作照护之间没有明显差异。42%的干预记录中讨论了护理人员的成果，突出了护理人员不同而复杂的经历。归纳分析再次证实了护理人员需求和经历的复杂性和广泛性：患者症状/心理社会干预并未影响护理者的福祉。干预措施应针对护理人员的特定需求。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊

Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing 医学-护理

CiteScore

3.30

自引率

10.00%

发文量

154

审稿时长

>12 weeks

期刊介绍： Official journal of the Preventive Cardiovascular Nurses Association, Journal of Cardiovascular Nursing is one of the leading journals for advanced practice nurses in cardiovascular care, providing thorough coverage of timely topics and information that is extremely practical for daily, on-the-job use. Each issue addresses the physiologic, psychologic, and social needs of cardiovascular patients and their families in a variety of environments. Regular columns include By the Bedside, Progress in Prevention, Pharmacology, Dysrhythmias, and Outcomes Research.