Florien W Boele1, Alasdair G Rooney, Helen Bulbeck, Paula Sherwood. 1. Leeds Institute of Health Sciences and Leeds Institute of Cancer and Pathology, University of Leeds and Leeds Cancer Centre, POG, Level 3, Bexley Wing, St James's Institute of Oncology, Leeds, UK, LS9 7TF.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The diagnosis and treatment of a brain or spinal cord tumour can have a huge impact on the lives of patients and their families with family caregiving often resulting in considerable burden and distress. Meeting the support needs of family caregivers is critical to maintain their emotional and physical health. Although support for caregivers is becoming more widely available, large-scale implementation is hindered by a lack of high-quality evidence for its effectiveness in the neuro-oncology caregiver population. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of supportive interventions at improving the well-being of caregivers of people with a brain or spinal cord tumour. To assess the effects of supportive interventions for caregivers in improving the physical and emotional well-being of people with a brain or spinal cord tumour and to evaluate the health economic benefits of supportive interventions for caregivers. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 7), MEDLINE via Ovid, and Embase via Ovid. We also handsearched relevant published conference abstracts (previous five years), publications in the two main journals in the field (previous year), searched for ongoing trials via ClinicalTrials.gov, and contacted research groups in the field. The initial search was in March 2017 with an update in August 2018 (handsearches completed in January 2019). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where caregivers of neuro-oncology patients constituted more than 20% of the sample and which evaluated changes in caregiver well-being following any supportive intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies and carried out risk of bias assessments. We aimed to extract data on the outcomes of psychological distress, burden, mastery, quality of patient-caregiver relationship, quality of life, and physical functioning. MAIN RESULTS: In total, the search identified 2102 records, of which we reviewed 144 in full text. We included eight studies. Four interventions focused on patient-caregiver dyads and four were aimed specifically at the caregiver. Heterogeneity of populations and methodologies precluded meta-analysis. Risk of bias varied, and all studies included only small numbers of neuro-oncology caregivers (13 to 56 participants). There was some evidence for positive effects of caregiver support on psychological distress, mastery, and quality of life (low to very low certainty of evidence). No studies reported significant effects on caregiver burden or quality of patient-caregiver relationship (low to very low certainty of evidence). None of the studies assessed caregiver physical functioning. For secondary outcomes (patient emotional or physical well-being; health economic effects), we found very little to no evidence for the effectiveness of caregiver support. We identified five ongoing trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The eight small-scale studies included employed different methodologies across different populations, with low certainty of evidence overall. It is not currently possible to draw reliable conclusions regarding the effectiveness of supportive interventions aimed at improving neuro-oncology caregiver well-being. More high-quality research is needed on support for family caregivers of people diagnosed, and living, with a brain or spinal cord tumour.
BACKGROUND: The diagnosis and treatment of a brain or spinal cord tumour can have a huge impact on the lives of patients and their families with family caregiving often resulting in considerable burden and distress. Meeting the support needs of family caregivers is critical to maintain their emotional and physical health. Although support for caregivers is becoming more widely available, large-scale implementation is hindered by a lack of high-quality evidence for its effectiveness in the neuro-oncology caregiver population. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effectiveness of supportive interventions at improving the well-being of caregivers of people with a brain or spinal cord tumour. To assess the effects of supportive interventions for caregivers in improving the physical and emotional well-being of people with a brain or spinal cord tumour and to evaluate the health economic benefits of supportive interventions for caregivers. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2018, Issue 7), MEDLINE via Ovid, and Embase via Ovid. We also handsearched relevant published conference abstracts (previous five years), publications in the two main journals in the field (previous year), searched for ongoing trials via ClinicalTrials.gov, and contacted research groups in the field. The initial search was in March 2017 with an update in August 2018 (handsearches completed in January 2019). SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where caregivers of neuro-oncology patients constituted more than 20% of the sample and which evaluated changes in caregiver well-being following any supportive intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors independently selected studies and carried out risk of bias assessments. We aimed to extract data on the outcomes of psychological distress, burden, mastery, quality of patient-caregiver relationship, quality of life, and physical functioning. MAIN RESULTS: In total, the search identified 2102 records, of which we reviewed 144 in full text. We included eight studies. Four interventions focused on patient-caregiver dyads and four were aimed specifically at the caregiver. Heterogeneity of populations and methodologies precluded meta-analysis. Risk of bias varied, and all studies included only small numbers of neuro-oncology caregivers (13 to 56 participants). There was some evidence for positive effects of caregiver support on psychological distress, mastery, and quality of life (low to very low certainty of evidence). No studies reported significant effects on caregiver burden or quality of patient-caregiver relationship (low to very low certainty of evidence). None of the studies assessed caregiver physical functioning. For secondary outcomes (patient emotional or physical well-being; health economic effects), we found very little to no evidence for the effectiveness of caregiver support. We identified five ongoing trials. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: The eight small-scale studies included employed different methodologies across different populations, with low certainty of evidence overall. It is not currently possible to draw reliable conclusions regarding the effectiveness of supportive interventions aimed at improving neuro-oncology caregiver well-being. More high-quality research is needed on support for family caregivers of people diagnosed, and living, with a brain or spinal cord tumour.
Authors: Neil K Aaronson; Martin J B Taphoorn; Jan J Heimans; Tjeerd J Postma; Chad M Gundy; Guus N Beute; Ben J Slotman; Martin Klein Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2011-10-17 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Bethany Russell; Anna Collins; Michael Dally; Anthony Dowling; Michelle Gold; Michael Murphy; Jennifer Philip Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2014-07-01 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Cornelie D Andela; Han Repping-Wuts; Nike M M L Stikkelbroeck; Mathilde C Pronk; Jitske Tiemensma; Ad R Hermus; Adrian A Kaptein; Alberto M Pereira; Noelle G A Kamminga; Nienke R Biermasz Journal: Eur J Endocrinol Date: 2017-07 Impact factor: 6.664
Authors: Roland Goldbrunner; Giuseppe Minniti; Matthias Preusser; Michael D Jenkinson; Kita Sallabanda; Emmanuel Houdart; Andreas von Deimling; Pantelis Stavrinou; Florence Lefranc; Morten Lund-Johansen; Elizabeth Cohen-Jonathan Moyal; Dieta Brandsma; Roger Henriksson; Riccardo Soffietti; Michael Weller Journal: Lancet Oncol Date: 2016-08-30 Impact factor: 41.316
Authors: Florien W Boele; Jason M Weimer; Anna L Marsland; Terri S Armstrong; Charles W Given; Jan Drappatz; Heidi S Donovan; Paula R Sherwood Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2021-10-16 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Joanna Sierpowska; Adrià Rofes; Kristoffer Dahlslätt; Emmanuel Mandonnet; Mark Ter Laan; Monika Połczyńska; Philip De Witt Hamer; Matej Halaj; Giannantonio Spena; Torstein R Meling; Kazuya Motomura; Andrés Felipe Reyes; Alexandre Rainha Campos; Pierre A Robe; Luca Zigiotto; Silvio Sarubbo; Christian F Freyschlag; Martijn P G Broen; George Stranjalis; Konstantinos Papadopoulos; Evangelia Liouta; Geert-Jan Rutten; Catarina Pessanha Viegas; Ana Silvestre; Federico Perrote; Natacha Brochero; Cynthia Cáceres; Agata Zdun-Ryżewska; Wojciech Kloc; Djaina Satoer; Olga Dragoy; Marc P H Hendriks; Juan C Alvarez-Carriles; Vitória Piai Journal: Neurooncol Pract Date: 2022-04-04
Authors: Florien W Boele; Jason Weimer; Amir H Zamanipoor Najafabadi; Louise Murray; Charles W Given; Barbara A Given; Heidi S Donovan; Jan Drappatz; Frank S Lieberman; Paula R Sherwood Journal: Cancer Nurs Date: 2021-09-30 Impact factor: 2.760
Authors: Amir H Zamanipoor Najafabadi; Pim B van der Meer; Florien W Boele; Martin J B Taphoorn; Martin Klein; Saskia M Peerdeman; Wouter R van Furth; Linda Dirven Journal: Neurooncol Adv Date: 2020-12-05
Authors: Emma Nicklin; Galina Velikova; Adam Glaser; Michelle Kwok-Williams; Miguel Debono; Naseem Sarwar; Florien Boele Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2021-10-12 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Tamara Ownsworth; Katarzyna Lion; Ursula M Sansom-Daly; Kerryn Pike; Eng-Siew Koh; Georgia K B Halkett; Mark B Pinkham; Raymond J Chan; Haryana M Dhillon Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2022-04-02 Impact factor: 3.955