Birte Østergaard, Erla Kolbrun-Svavarsdottir, Anne Brødsgaard, Stine Rosenstrøm, Cristina Garcia-Vivar, Hanne Konradsen, Karin Brochstedt-Dieperink, Lorenz Imhof, Romy Mahrer-Imhof, Marie Louise Luttik
{"title":"The Effectiveness of Family Health Conversations Delivered by Nurses: A Systematic Review.","authors":"Birte Østergaard, Erla Kolbrun-Svavarsdottir, Anne Brødsgaard, Stine Rosenstrøm, Cristina Garcia-Vivar, Hanne Konradsen, Karin Brochstedt-Dieperink, Lorenz Imhof, Romy Mahrer-Imhof, Marie Louise Luttik","doi":"10.1111/jocn.70058","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Aim: </strong>To extract and interpret quantitative data exploring the effectiveness of family health conversations (FHCs) on family functioning, perceived support, health-related quality of life, caregiver burden and family health in families living with critical or chronic health conditions.</p><p><strong>Background: </strong>Addressing the health of families affected by critical or chronic illnesses requires focused attention. The effective integration of FHCs is hampered by a scarcity of rigorous quantitative studies that provide solid evidence on best practices and outcomes.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>A systematic review following the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>The review is reported according to the PRISMA 2020 checklist. Appropriate studies were searched in PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus and Cochrane Databases. Results of the search were imported into the Covidence web-based program. Included were studies with a quantitative research design, delivered to families with critical or chronic health conditions, describing FHCs based on the Calgary Family Assessment Model and/or the Calgary Family Intervention Model, and/or the Illness Beliefs Model, using reliable and validated instruments, published between 2008 and 2023, and written in English.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>In total, 24 papers met the inclusion criteria. Sixteen papers used a quasi-experimental design, eight of which included a control group. Two papers used a mixed methods design, and six papers were randomised controlled trials (RCTs). A statistically significant effect of FHCs on family functioning was reported in two RCTs and three quasi-experimental papers. We also found that a statistically significant effect of FHCs was reported on perceived support in 9 of 15 papers, quality of life in 4 of 11 papers and caregiver burden in 1 of 3 papers.</p><p><strong>Conclusion and implications for clinical practice: </strong>The interventions reviewed revealed variability and partial results concerning the effectiveness of FHCs on family functioning. More rigorous research about short-term, intermediate- and long-term effectiveness is needed before conclusions can be drawn.</p><p><strong>Reporting method: </strong>The study is reported according to the PRISMA 2020 (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) (File S1).</p><p><strong>Patient or public contribution: </strong>No patient or public contribution. Data were gathered from previously published studies.</p>","PeriodicalId":50236,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Clinical Nursing","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":3.5000,"publicationDate":"2025-08-05","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Clinical Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1111/jocn.70058","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Aim: To extract and interpret quantitative data exploring the effectiveness of family health conversations (FHCs) on family functioning, perceived support, health-related quality of life, caregiver burden and family health in families living with critical or chronic health conditions.
Background: Addressing the health of families affected by critical or chronic illnesses requires focused attention. The effective integration of FHCs is hampered by a scarcity of rigorous quantitative studies that provide solid evidence on best practices and outcomes.
Design: A systematic review following the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines.
Methods: The review is reported according to the PRISMA 2020 checklist. Appropriate studies were searched in PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus and Cochrane Databases. Results of the search were imported into the Covidence web-based program. Included were studies with a quantitative research design, delivered to families with critical or chronic health conditions, describing FHCs based on the Calgary Family Assessment Model and/or the Calgary Family Intervention Model, and/or the Illness Beliefs Model, using reliable and validated instruments, published between 2008 and 2023, and written in English.
Results: In total, 24 papers met the inclusion criteria. Sixteen papers used a quasi-experimental design, eight of which included a control group. Two papers used a mixed methods design, and six papers were randomised controlled trials (RCTs). A statistically significant effect of FHCs on family functioning was reported in two RCTs and three quasi-experimental papers. We also found that a statistically significant effect of FHCs was reported on perceived support in 9 of 15 papers, quality of life in 4 of 11 papers and caregiver burden in 1 of 3 papers.
Conclusion and implications for clinical practice: The interventions reviewed revealed variability and partial results concerning the effectiveness of FHCs on family functioning. More rigorous research about short-term, intermediate- and long-term effectiveness is needed before conclusions can be drawn.
Reporting method: The study is reported according to the PRISMA 2020 (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) (File S1).
Patient or public contribution: No patient or public contribution. Data were gathered from previously published studies.
期刊介绍：
The Journal of Clinical Nursing (JCN) is an international, peer reviewed, scientific journal that seeks to promote the development and exchange of knowledge that is directly relevant to all spheres of nursing practice. The primary aim is to promote a high standard of clinically related scholarship which advances and supports the practice and discipline of nursing. The Journal also aims to promote the international exchange of ideas and experience that draws from the different cultures in which practice takes place. Further, JCN seeks to enrich insight into clinical need and the implications for nursing intervention and models of service delivery. Emphasis is placed on promoting critical debate on the art and science of nursing practice.
JCN is essential reading for anyone involved in nursing practice, whether clinicians, researchers, educators, managers, policy makers, or students. The development of clinical practice and the changing patterns of inter-professional working are also central to JCN''s scope of interest. Contributions are welcomed from other health professionals on issues that have a direct impact on nursing practice.
We publish high quality papers from across the methodological spectrum that make an important and novel contribution to the field of clinical nursing (regardless of where care is provided), and which demonstrate clinical application and international relevance.
求助内容：
应助结果提醒方式：
京公网安备 11010802042870号
