Effectiveness of interventions for informal caregivers of people with end-stage chronic illness: a systematic review.

IF 6.3 4区 医学 Q1 MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL
K McGuigan, G Laurente, A Christie, C Carswell, C Moran, M M Yaqoob, S Bolton, R Mullan, S Rej, P Gilbert, C McKeaveney, C McVeigh, C Tierney, J Reid, I Walsh, T Forbes, H Noble
{"title":"Effectiveness of interventions for informal caregivers of people with end-stage chronic illness: a systematic review.","authors":"K McGuigan, G Laurente, A Christie, C Carswell, C Moran, M M Yaqoob, S Bolton, R Mullan, S Rej, P Gilbert, C McKeaveney, C McVeigh, C Tierney, J Reid, I Walsh, T Forbes, H Noble","doi":"10.1186/s13643-024-02641-x","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>People living with advanced, non-malignant chronic conditions often have extensive and complex care needs. Informal or family caregivers often provide the care and support needed by those with advanced chronic conditions at home. These informal caregivers experience many challenges associated with their caring role, which can impact their own wellbeing. Whilst there is growing evidence around the impact on carers, guidance on support for informal caregivers of patients with advanced, non-malignant, chronic conditions is lacking, with little evidence available on effective psychosocial carer interventions. This systematic review explored existing interventions for caregivers of those with advanced, non-malignant, chronic illness, in order to assess the effectiveness of these interventions in improving psychosocial outcomes.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Electronic databases, Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsycINFO, were searched up to the end of March 2023. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria, focusing on interventions to improve psychosocial outcomes, such as depression, anxiety, quality of life, and caregiver burden, in this cohort of caregivers were included. Data were extracted regarding study setting, design, methods, intervention components, and outcomes. Risk of bias and quality assessment were conducted.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 5281 articles were screened, ultimately identifying 12 studies for inclusion, reported in 13 publications. A narrative synthesis revealed mixed results. Psychosocial interventions resulted in more significant improvements in psychosocial outcomes than psychoeducational or support interventions, with interventions for carer-patient dyads also reflecting more positive outcomes for caregivers. Evidence-based interventions, guided by an appropriate theoretical model, were reportedly more effective in improving caregiver outcomes. Differences in outcomes were related to intervention development, design, delivery, and outcome assessment.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>This review, to our knowledge, is the first to explore the effectiveness of interventions in improving psychosocial outcomes for caregivers of those with advanced, non-malignant, chronic conditions. The review highlights the need for more robust, sufficiently powered, high-quality trials of evidence-based interventions for caregivers of people with advanced chronic illness. Optimal intervention duration and frequency of sessions are unclear and need further exploration.</p>","PeriodicalId":22162,"journal":{"name":"Systematic Reviews","volume":"13 1","pages":"245"},"PeriodicalIF":6.3000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-28","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11438131/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Systematic Reviews","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1186/s13643-024-02641-x","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MEDICINE, GENERAL & INTERNAL","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: People living with advanced, non-malignant chronic conditions often have extensive and complex care needs. Informal or family caregivers often provide the care and support needed by those with advanced chronic conditions at home. These informal caregivers experience many challenges associated with their caring role, which can impact their own wellbeing. Whilst there is growing evidence around the impact on carers, guidance on support for informal caregivers of patients with advanced, non-malignant, chronic conditions is lacking, with little evidence available on effective psychosocial carer interventions. This systematic review explored existing interventions for caregivers of those with advanced, non-malignant, chronic illness, in order to assess the effectiveness of these interventions in improving psychosocial outcomes.

Methods: Electronic databases, Medline, CINAHL, EMBASE, and PsycINFO, were searched up to the end of March 2023. Studies meeting the inclusion criteria, focusing on interventions to improve psychosocial outcomes, such as depression, anxiety, quality of life, and caregiver burden, in this cohort of caregivers were included. Data were extracted regarding study setting, design, methods, intervention components, and outcomes. Risk of bias and quality assessment were conducted.

Results: A total of 5281 articles were screened, ultimately identifying 12 studies for inclusion, reported in 13 publications. A narrative synthesis revealed mixed results. Psychosocial interventions resulted in more significant improvements in psychosocial outcomes than psychoeducational or support interventions, with interventions for carer-patient dyads also reflecting more positive outcomes for caregivers. Evidence-based interventions, guided by an appropriate theoretical model, were reportedly more effective in improving caregiver outcomes. Differences in outcomes were related to intervention development, design, delivery, and outcome assessment.

Conclusions: This review, to our knowledge, is the first to explore the effectiveness of interventions in improving psychosocial outcomes for caregivers of those with advanced, non-malignant, chronic conditions. The review highlights the need for more robust, sufficiently powered, high-quality trials of evidence-based interventions for caregivers of people with advanced chronic illness. Optimal intervention duration and frequency of sessions are unclear and need further exploration.

对终末期慢性病患者的非正式照顾者进行干预的有效性:系统性综述。
背景:晚期非恶性慢性病患者通常有广泛而复杂的护理需求。晚期慢性病患者在家中所需的护理和支持通常由非正式或家庭护理人员提供。这些非正规护理人员在履行护理职责时会遇到许多挑战,这可能会影响他们自身的健康。虽然有越来越多的证据表明了护理者所受到的影响,但对于晚期非恶性慢性病患者的非正规护理者的支持却缺乏指导,而且几乎没有证据表明对护理者进行了有效的社会心理干预。本系统性综述探讨了针对晚期非恶性慢性病患者照顾者的现有干预措施,以评估这些干预措施在改善社会心理结果方面的有效性:对 Medline、CINAHL、EMBASE 和 PsycINFO 等电子数据库进行了检索,检索期截至 2023 年 3 月底。符合纳入标准的研究均被纳入其中,这些研究主要关注的是对该护理人群进行干预以改善其心理社会结果,如抑郁、焦虑、生活质量和护理负担。我们提取了有关研究环境、设计、方法、干预内容和结果的数据。并进行了偏倚风险和质量评估:共筛选了 5281 篇文章,最终确定纳入 12 项研究,这些研究在 13 份出版物中进行了报道。叙述性综述显示了不同的结果。与心理教育或支持性干预相比,心理社会干预对心理社会结果的改善更为显著,对照护者-患者组合的干预也对照护者产生了更为积极的结果。据报道,以适当理论模型为指导的循证干预对改善照顾者的结果更为有效。结果的差异与干预的开发、设计、实施和结果评估有关:据我们所知,本综述首次探讨了干预措施在改善晚期非恶性慢性病患者照顾者的心理社会效果方面的有效性。该综述强调,需要对晚期慢性病患者的照顾者进行更多稳健、有充分证据支持的高质量循证干预试验。最佳干预持续时间和疗程频率尚不明确,需要进一步探讨。
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
Systematic Reviews
Systematic Reviews Medicine-Medicine (miscellaneous)
CiteScore
8.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
241
审稿时长
11 weeks
期刊介绍: Systematic Reviews encompasses all aspects of the design, conduct and reporting of systematic reviews. The journal publishes high quality systematic review products including systematic review protocols, systematic reviews related to a very broad definition of health, rapid reviews, updates of already completed systematic reviews, and methods research related to the science of systematic reviews, such as decision modelling. At this time Systematic Reviews does not accept reviews of in vitro studies. The journal also aims to ensure that the results of all well-conducted systematic reviews are published, regardless of their outcome.
×
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:481959085
Book学术官方微信