Debra Parker Oliver1, George Demiris2, Karla Washington1, Robin L Kruse1, Greg Petroski3. 1. 1 Curtis W. and Ann H. Department of Family and Community Medicine, University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA. 2. 2 Biobehavioral Nursing and Health Systems, School of Nursing & Biomedical and Health Informatics, School of Medicine, University of Washington, Seattle, WA, USA. 3. 3 University of Missouri, Columbia, MO, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE:Untrained family caregivers struggle with complicated medical management regimens for hospice patients. An intervention was tested to improve caregiver's perception of pain management and patient's pain. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The intervention was tested with a 2-group (usual care vs intervention) randomized controlled trial using parallel mixed-methods analysis of 446 caregivers in 3 Midwestern hospice programs representing rural and urban settings. INTERVENTION: Web conferencing or telephones were used to connect caregivers with the hospice care team during care plan meetings. MEASUREMENTS: Caregiver's perceptions of pain management were the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included caregiver quality of life, patient's pain, and anxiety. Video recordings, field notes, and caregiver and staff interviews provided qualitative data. RESULTS: The overall perception of pain management was not changed by the participation in hospice team meetings. Perceptions of fatalism improved for intervention participants, and the intervention participants perceived their patients' pain was better controlled than those in the control group. The intervention was found to be feasible to deliver in rural areas. Caregiver's anxiety and patient's pain were correlated ( r = .18; P = .003), and subanalysis indicated that caregivers of patients with cancer may benefit more from the intervention than other hospice caregivers. Qualitative analyses provided understanding of caregiver's perceptions of pain, cost, and facilitators and barriers to routine involvement of family in care plan meetings. Limitations and Conclusion: The hospice philosophy is supportive of caregiver involvement in care planning, and technology makes this feasible; the intervention needs modification to become translational as well as additional measurement to assess effectiveness. Caregiver education and emotional support should occur outside the meeting, and a strong leader should facilitate the meeting to control efficiency. Finally, the intervention may benefit caregivers of patients with cancer more than others.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Untrained family caregivers struggle with complicated medical management regimens for hospice patients. An intervention was tested to improve caregiver's perception of pain management and patient's pain. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: The intervention was tested with a 2-group (usual care vs intervention) randomized controlled trial using parallel mixed-methods analysis of 446 caregivers in 3 Midwestern hospice programs representing rural and urban settings. INTERVENTION: Web conferencing or telephones were used to connect caregivers with the hospice care team during care plan meetings. MEASUREMENTS: Caregiver's perceptions of pain management were the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included caregiver quality of life, patient's pain, and anxiety. Video recordings, field notes, and caregiver and staff interviews provided qualitative data. RESULTS: The overall perception of pain management was not changed by the participation in hospice team meetings. Perceptions of fatalism improved for intervention participants, and the intervention participants perceived their patients' pain was better controlled than those in the control group. The intervention was found to be feasible to deliver in rural areas. Caregiver's anxiety and patient's pain were correlated ( r = .18; P = .003), and subanalysis indicated that caregivers of patients with cancer may benefit more from the intervention than other hospice caregivers. Qualitative analyses provided understanding of caregiver's perceptions of pain, cost, and facilitators and barriers to routine involvement of family in care plan meetings. Limitations and Conclusion: The hospice philosophy is supportive of caregiver involvement in care planning, and technology makes this feasible; the intervention needs modification to become translational as well as additional measurement to assess effectiveness. Caregiver education and emotional support should occur outside the meeting, and a strong leader should facilitate the meeting to control efficiency. Finally, the intervention may benefit caregivers of patients with cancer more than others.
Authors: Elaine Wittenberg-Lyles; Joy Goldsmith; Debra Parker Oliver; George Demiris; Robin L Kruse; Stephanie Van Stee Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2013-08-12 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Karla T Washington; Elaine Wittenberg-Lyles; Debra Parker Oliver; George Demiris; Sara Shaunfield; Edith Crumb Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2012-10-04 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Joan Harrold; Elizabeth Rickerson; Janet T Carroll; Jennifer McGrath; Knashawn Morales; Jennifer Kapo; David Casarett Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2005-06 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: David L Albright; Karla Washington; Debra Parker-Oliver; Alexandria Lewis; Robin L Kruse; George Demiris Journal: J Pain Symptom Manage Date: 2015-11-03 Impact factor: 3.612
Authors: Elaine Wittenberg-Lyles; Debra Parker Oliver; George Demiris; Karla T Washington; Kelly Regehr; Heidi M Wilder Journal: Res Gerontol Nurs Date: 2010-04-20 Impact factor: 1.571
Authors: Bernd Löwe; Oliver Decker; Stefanie Müller; Elmar Brähler; Dieter Schellberg; Wolfgang Herzog; Philipp Yorck Herzberg Journal: Med Care Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 2.983
Authors: Karla T Washington; Debra Parker Oliver; L Ashley Gage; David L Albright; George Demiris Journal: Palliat Med Date: 2015-08-17 Impact factor: 4.762
Authors: Richard A Taylor; Cardinale B Smith; Heather Coats; Laura P Gelfman; J Nicholas Dionne-Odom Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2017-09-28 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Rebecca E Ryan; Michael Connolly; Natalie K Bradford; Simon Henderson; Anthony Herbert; Lina Schonfeld; Jeanine Young; Josephine I Bothroyd; Amanda Henderson Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2022-07-08
Authors: Debra Parker Oliver; Karla T Washington; Jacquelyn Benson; Patrick White; Dulce Cruz Oliver; Jamie B Smith; Joshua Mazur; Abeba Lakew; Alexandra Lewis; George Demiris Journal: J Soc Work End Life Palliat Care Date: 2022-03-12
Authors: Lucinda J Graven; Robert L Glueckauf; Rachel A Regal; Nancy K Merbitz; Mia L A Lustria; Brittny A James Journal: Int J Telemed Appl Date: 2021-05-21