Soojung Ahn1, Rafael D Romo2, Cathy L Campbell3. 1. School of Nursing, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA. Electronic address: sa4ve@virginia.edu. 2. School of Nursing, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA; Department of Nursing, Dominican University of California, San Rafael, USA. 3. School of Nursing, University of Virginia, Charlottesville, USA.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To examine the characteristics of interventions to support family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: Five databases (CINAHL, Medline, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library) were searched for English language articles of intervention studies utilizing randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental designs, reporting caregiver-related outcomes of interventions for family caregivers caring for patients with advanced cancer at home. RESULTS: A total of 11 studies met the inclusion criteria. Based on these studies, the types of interventions were categorized into psychosocial, educational, or both. The characteristics of interventions varied. Most interventions demonstrated statistically significant results of reducing psychological distress and caregiving burden and improving quality of life, self-efficacy, and competence for caregiving. However, there was inconsistency in the use of measures. CONCLUSIONS: Most studies showed positive effects of the interventions on caregiver-specific outcomes, yet direct comparisons of the effectiveness were limited. There is a lack of research aimed to support family caregivers' physical health. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Given caregivers' needs to maintain their wellbeing and the positive effects of support for them, research examining long-term efficacy of interventions and measuring objective health outcomes with rigorous quality of studies is still needed for better outcomes for family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer.
OBJECTIVE: To examine the characteristics of interventions to support family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer. METHODS: Five databases (CINAHL, Medline, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and the Cochrane Library) were searched for English language articles of intervention studies utilizing randomized controlled trials or quasi-experimental designs, reporting caregiver-related outcomes of interventions for family caregivers caring for patients with advanced cancer at home. RESULTS: A total of 11 studies met the inclusion criteria. Based on these studies, the types of interventions were categorized into psychosocial, educational, or both. The characteristics of interventions varied. Most interventions demonstrated statistically significant results of reducing psychological distress and caregiving burden and improving quality of life, self-efficacy, and competence for caregiving. However, there was inconsistency in the use of measures. CONCLUSIONS: Most studies showed positive effects of the interventions on caregiver-specific outcomes, yet direct comparisons of the effectiveness were limited. There is a lack of research aimed to support family caregivers' physical health. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Given caregivers' needs to maintain their wellbeing and the positive effects of support for them, research examining long-term efficacy of interventions and measuring objective health outcomes with rigorous quality of studies is still needed for better outcomes for family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer.
Authors: Wendy M Rodgers; David Markland; Anne-Marie Selzler; Terra C Murray; Philip M Wilson Journal: Res Q Exerc Sport Date: 2014-12 Impact factor: 2.500
Authors: Lee A Kehoe; Huiwen Xu; Paul Duberstein; Kah Poh Loh; Eva Culakova; Beverly Canin; Arti Hurria; William Dale; Megan Wells; Nikesha Gilmore; Amber S Kleckner; Jennifer Lund; Charles Kamen; Marie Flannery; Mike Hoerger; Judith O Hopkins; Jane Jijun Liu; Jodi Geer; Ron Epstein; Supriya G Mohile Journal: J Am Geriatr Soc Date: 2019-03-29 Impact factor: 5.562
Authors: Peter Hudson; Tom Trauer; Brian Kelly; Moira O'Connor; Kristina Thomas; Michael Summers; Rachel Zordan; Vicki White Journal: Psychooncology Date: 2013-01-21 Impact factor: 3.894
Authors: Raeanne C Moore; Elizabeth A Chattillion; Jennifer Ceglowski; Jennifer Ho; Roland von Känel; Paul J Mills; Michael G Ziegler; Thomas L Patterson; Igor Grant; Brent T Mausbach Journal: Behav Res Ther Date: 2013-07-19
Authors: Julian P T Higgins; Douglas G Altman; Peter C Gøtzsche; Peter Jüni; David Moher; Andrew D Oxman; Jelena Savovic; Kenneth F Schulz; Laura Weeks; Jonathan A C Sterne Journal: BMJ Date: 2011-10-18
Authors: Maaike van der Wel; Doris van der Smissen; Sigrid Dierickx; Joachim Cohen; Peter Hudson; Aline De Vleminck; Lydia Tutt; David Scott; Silvia Di Leo; Caroline Moeller Arnfeldt; Catherine Jordan; Laurel Northouse; Judith Rietjens; Agnes van der Heide; Erica Witkamp Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2022-10-12 Impact factor: 3.359
Authors: Ingebrigt Røen; Anne-Tove Brenne; Cinzia Brunelli; Hans Stifoss-Hanssen; Gunn Grande; Tora Skeidsvoll Solheim; Stein Kaasa; Anne Kari Knudsen Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2021-03-04 Impact factor: 3.603