{"title":"针对后天性脑损伤患者护理人员的同伴和临床医生干预效果评估随机试验","authors":"","doi":"10.1016/j.arrct.2024.100351","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To evaluate the effectiveness of 2 interventions for caregivers of patients with acquired brain injury (ABI) transitioning home after inpatient rehabilitation, to prepare them for the role of caregiving and reduce stress and depression.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>Controlled trial with participants randomly assigned to (1) usual care (UC), (2) clinician-delivered Problem-Solving Training (PST), or (3) peer-led Building Better Caregivers (BBC) training; both experimental interventions initiated during the inpatient rehabilitation stay, delivered virtually, of similar intensity (six 60-minute sessions), and focused on managing stress and building skills related to caregiving.</p></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><p>Nonprofit rehabilitation hospital specializing in care of persons with acquired brain and spinal cord injuries.</p></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><p>Caregivers (n=169) of patients with ABI (54 stroke; 115 other ABI) admitted for rehabilitation whose discharge location was home with care provided by family members (caregivers: 83% women, 62% White, age [mean ± SD]: 51±11.5 y). Participants were recruited from February 2021 to November 2022, when COVID-19 restrictions were in place.</p></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><p>Noted above.</p></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3><p>Caregiver-reported stress, depressive symptoms, and caregiving self-efficacy; patient unplanned hospital readmissions and emergency department visits 30 days post discharge.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Only 61% of participants in the 2 intervention groups completed 3 or more of 6 intervention sessions and only 53% completed all data collection surveys. Statistically significant improvements between UC and PST groups were noted for caregiver stress (<em>p</em>=.039). Positive differences in caregiver self-efficacy found between UC and the BBC intervention groups approached significance at 30 days after discharge (<em>p</em>=.054). Patient unplanned hospital readmissions and days hospitalized were also higher, albeit not statistically significant, for UC participants than both intervention groups.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Although positive findings were noted, results were negatively affected by study limitations including low enrollment and limited engagement (intervention completion and follow-up outcomes assessment). These limitations resulted, in part, from restrictions put into place during the COVID-19 pandemic, which limited contact with study participants and required alterations to the BBC intervention likely influencing its effectiveness. Despite limitations noted, the encouraging findings suggest the need for further research.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":72291,"journal":{"name":"Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation","volume":"6 3","pages":"Article 100351"},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590109524000491/pdfft?md5=0f36b77514f9315c393427f79f61f0d7&pid=1-s2.0-S2590109524000491-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Randomized Trial to Evaluate Effects of Peer- and Clinician-Led Interventions for Caregivers of Individuals With Acquired Brain Injury\",\"authors\":\"\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.arrct.2024.100351\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>To evaluate the effectiveness of 2 interventions for caregivers of patients with acquired brain injury (ABI) transitioning home after inpatient rehabilitation, to prepare them for the role of caregiving and reduce stress and depression.</p></div><div><h3>Design</h3><p>Controlled trial with participants randomly assigned to (1) usual care (UC), (2) clinician-delivered Problem-Solving Training (PST), or (3) peer-led Building Better Caregivers (BBC) training; both experimental interventions initiated during the inpatient rehabilitation stay, delivered virtually, of similar intensity (six 60-minute sessions), and focused on managing stress and building skills related to caregiving.</p></div><div><h3>Setting</h3><p>Nonprofit rehabilitation hospital specializing in care of persons with acquired brain and spinal cord injuries.</p></div><div><h3>Participants</h3><p>Caregivers (n=169) of patients with ABI (54 stroke; 115 other ABI) admitted for rehabilitation whose discharge location was home with care provided by family members (caregivers: 83% women, 62% White, age [mean ± SD]: 51±11.5 y). Participants were recruited from February 2021 to November 2022, when COVID-19 restrictions were in place.</p></div><div><h3>Interventions</h3><p>Noted above.</p></div><div><h3>Main Outcome Measures</h3><p>Caregiver-reported stress, depressive symptoms, and caregiving self-efficacy; patient unplanned hospital readmissions and emergency department visits 30 days post discharge.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Only 61% of participants in the 2 intervention groups completed 3 or more of 6 intervention sessions and only 53% completed all data collection surveys. Statistically significant improvements between UC and PST groups were noted for caregiver stress (<em>p</em>=.039). Positive differences in caregiver self-efficacy found between UC and the BBC intervention groups approached significance at 30 days after discharge (<em>p</em>=.054). Patient unplanned hospital readmissions and days hospitalized were also higher, albeit not statistically significant, for UC participants than both intervention groups.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Although positive findings were noted, results were negatively affected by study limitations including low enrollment and limited engagement (intervention completion and follow-up outcomes assessment). These limitations resulted, in part, from restrictions put into place during the COVID-19 pandemic, which limited contact with study participants and required alterations to the BBC intervention likely influencing its effectiveness. Despite limitations noted, the encouraging findings suggest the need for further research.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":72291,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation\",\"volume\":\"6 3\",\"pages\":\"Article 100351\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.9000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590109524000491/pdfft?md5=0f36b77514f9315c393427f79f61f0d7&pid=1-s2.0-S2590109524000491-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590109524000491\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q2\",\"JCRName\":\"REHABILITATION\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of rehabilitation research and clinical translation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2590109524000491","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"REHABILITATION","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
摘要
目的评估对住院康复后回家的后天性脑损伤(ABI)患者的照护者采取两种干预措施的效果,以帮助他们为照护角色做好准备并减轻压力和抑郁。设计对照试验,参与者被随机分配到(1)常规护理(UC)、(2)临床医生提供的问题解决培训(PST)或(3)同伴主导的 "建设更好的护理者"(BBC)培训;这两种实验性干预都是在住院康复期间开始的,以虚拟方式进行,强度相似(6 次 60 分钟的课程),重点是管理压力和培养与护理相关的技能。环境非营利性康复医院,专为后天性脑损伤和脊髓损伤患者提供护理服务。参与者169名接受康复治疗的ABI患者(54名中风患者;115名其他ABI患者)的护理者(n=169),这些患者的出院地点为家中,由家人提供护理服务(护理者:83%为女性,62%为白人,年龄[平均值±标准差]:51±11.5岁)。主要结果测量护理人员报告的压力、抑郁症状和护理自我效能;患者出院后30天的非计划再入院率和急诊就诊率。结果2个干预组中只有61%的参与者完成了6次干预中的3次或更多次,只有53%的参与者完成了所有数据收集调查。在护理人员压力方面,UC 组和 PST 组之间存在明显的统计学差异(P=0.039)。出院后 30 天,UC 组和 BBC 干预组在护理人员自我效能方面的积极差异接近显著水平(p=.054)。尽管有积极的发现,但研究的局限性对结果产生了负面影响,包括入选率低和参与度有限(干预完成和后续结果评估)。这些局限性的部分原因是 COVID-19 大流行期间实施的限制措施,这些限制措施限制了与研究参与者的接触,并要求对 BBC 干预措施进行修改,这可能会影响其有效性。尽管存在上述局限性,但令人鼓舞的研究结果表明有必要开展进一步的研究。
Randomized Trial to Evaluate Effects of Peer- and Clinician-Led Interventions for Caregivers of Individuals With Acquired Brain Injury
Objective
To evaluate the effectiveness of 2 interventions for caregivers of patients with acquired brain injury (ABI) transitioning home after inpatient rehabilitation, to prepare them for the role of caregiving and reduce stress and depression.
Design
Controlled trial with participants randomly assigned to (1) usual care (UC), (2) clinician-delivered Problem-Solving Training (PST), or (3) peer-led Building Better Caregivers (BBC) training; both experimental interventions initiated during the inpatient rehabilitation stay, delivered virtually, of similar intensity (six 60-minute sessions), and focused on managing stress and building skills related to caregiving.
Setting
Nonprofit rehabilitation hospital specializing in care of persons with acquired brain and spinal cord injuries.
Participants
Caregivers (n=169) of patients with ABI (54 stroke; 115 other ABI) admitted for rehabilitation whose discharge location was home with care provided by family members (caregivers: 83% women, 62% White, age [mean ± SD]: 51±11.5 y). Participants were recruited from February 2021 to November 2022, when COVID-19 restrictions were in place.
Interventions
Noted above.
Main Outcome Measures
Caregiver-reported stress, depressive symptoms, and caregiving self-efficacy; patient unplanned hospital readmissions and emergency department visits 30 days post discharge.
Results
Only 61% of participants in the 2 intervention groups completed 3 or more of 6 intervention sessions and only 53% completed all data collection surveys. Statistically significant improvements between UC and PST groups were noted for caregiver stress (p=.039). Positive differences in caregiver self-efficacy found between UC and the BBC intervention groups approached significance at 30 days after discharge (p=.054). Patient unplanned hospital readmissions and days hospitalized were also higher, albeit not statistically significant, for UC participants than both intervention groups.
Conclusions
Although positive findings were noted, results were negatively affected by study limitations including low enrollment and limited engagement (intervention completion and follow-up outcomes assessment). These limitations resulted, in part, from restrictions put into place during the COVID-19 pandemic, which limited contact with study participants and required alterations to the BBC intervention likely influencing its effectiveness. Despite limitations noted, the encouraging findings suggest the need for further research.