Lesli Hokanson1, Michael Gerhardt Quinn1, Natalie Schüz1,2, Kristy de Salas1, Jenn Scott3. 1. University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia. 2. German Pension Insurance Oldenburg-Bremen, Schwachhauser Heerstr. 32-34, 28209, Bremen, Germany. 3. University of Tasmania, Hobart, Australia. Jenn.Scott@utas.edu.au.
Abstract
PURPOSE: There is a global increase in chronic, degenerative illnesses that require long-term intervention and support as a result of the aging population. The majority of support needs are met by informal family caregivers. While there have been three decades of research focusing on caregivers in general, the extent to which research has focused on Indigenous caregivers is unclear. Worldwide, Indigenous peoples face severe economic and health disadvantages that may make them even more vulnerable to the negative aspects of informal caregiving. The current systematic review aimed to synthesize the extant literature on Indigenous caregiver functioning and the interventions that are efficacious in alleviating Indigenous caregiver distress. METHODS: Systematic review Inclusion criteria were peer-reviewed quantitative studies examining Indigenous caregiver functioning or evaluating Indigenous caregiver interventions. RESULTS: 1172 unique records were located in the final search undertaken; only 7 articles, representing 6 unique studies, met the full inclusion criteria. Most studies contained numerous methodological weaknesses that compromised the reliability and validity of findings. Available studies suggest poor health and high burden among Indigenous relative to non-Indigenous caregivers. However, high levels of positive aspects of caregiving were reported in one study. A single intervention study suggests that poor health outcomes among Indigenous caregivers can be alleviated, though the quality and focus of this study was sub-optimal. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there is very little quality evidence around Indigenous caregiver functioning. Future research in this area would benefit from greater adherence to the standards of research that contribute to a strong and reliable evidence base.
PURPOSE: There is a global increase in chronic, degenerative illnesses that require long-term intervention and support as a result of the aging population. The majority of support needs are met by informal family caregivers. While there have been three decades of research focusing on caregivers in general, the extent to which research has focused on Indigenous caregivers is unclear. Worldwide, Indigenous peoples face severe economic and health disadvantages that may make them even more vulnerable to the negative aspects of informal caregiving. The current systematic review aimed to synthesize the extant literature on Indigenous caregiver functioning and the interventions that are efficacious in alleviating Indigenous caregiver distress. METHODS: Systematic review Inclusion criteria were peer-reviewed quantitative studies examining Indigenous caregiver functioning or evaluating Indigenous caregiver interventions. RESULTS: 1172 unique records were located in the final search undertaken; only 7 articles, representing 6 unique studies, met the full inclusion criteria. Most studies contained numerous methodological weaknesses that compromised the reliability and validity of findings. Available studies suggest poor health and high burden among Indigenous relative to non-Indigenous caregivers. However, high levels of positive aspects of caregiving were reported in one study. A single intervention study suggests that poor health outcomes among Indigenous caregivers can be alleviated, though the quality and focus of this study was sub-optimal. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, there is very little quality evidence around Indigenous caregiver functioning. Future research in this area would benefit from greater adherence to the standards of research that contribute to a strong and reliable evidence base.
Entities:
Keywords:
Caregiving; Coping; Family caregivers; Indigenous; Psychological functioning; Systematic review
Authors: S Melinda Spencer; R Turner Goins; Jeffrey A Henderson; Yang Wen; Jack Goldberg Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2013-09-03 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Larissa Shamseer; David Moher; Mike Clarke; Davina Ghersi; Alessandro Liberati; Mark Petticrew; Paul Shekelle; Lesley A Stewart Journal: BMJ Date: 2015-01-02