Ethan G Lester1,2, Ryan A Mace1,2, Sarah M Bannon1,2, Paula J Popok1, Melissa V Gates1, Emma Meyers1,2, Tara Tehan3, Danielle Sagueiro3, Jonathan Rosand2,3,4, Eric A Macklin2,5, Ana-Maria Vranceanu6,7,8. 1. Integrated Brain Health Clinical and Research Program, Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, One Bowdoin Square, 1st Floor, Suite 100, Boston, MA, USA. 2. Harvard Medical School, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA. 3. Neuroscience Intensive Care Unit, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 4. Henry and Allison McCance Center for Brain Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 5. Biostatistics Center, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. 6. Integrated Brain Health Clinical and Research Program, Department of Psychiatry, Massachusetts General Hospital/Harvard Medical School, One Bowdoin Square, 1st Floor, Suite 100, Boston, MA, USA. avranceanu@mgh.harvard.edu. 7. Harvard Medical School, Harvard University, Boston, MA, USA. avranceanu@mgh.harvard.edu. 8. Henry and Allison McCance Center for Brain Health, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, MA, USA. avranceanu@mgh.harvard.edu.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Neuro-ICU hospitalization for an acute neurological illness is often traumatic and associated with heightened emotional distress and reduced quality of life (QoL) for both survivors and their informal caregivers (i.e., family and friends providing unpaid care). In a pilot study, we previously showed that a dyadic (survivor and caregiver together) resiliency intervention (Recovering Together [RT]) was feasible and associated with sustained improvement in emotional distress when compared with an attention placebo educational control. Here we report on changes in secondary outcomes assessing QoL. METHODS: Survivors (n = 58) and informal caregivers (n = 58) completed assessments at bedside and were randomly assigned to participate together as a dyad in the RT or control intervention (both 6 weeks, two in-person sessions at bedside and four sessions via live video post discharge). We measured QoL domain scores (physical health, psychological, social relations, and environmental), general QoL, and QoL satisfaction using the World Health Organization Quality of Life Abbreviated Instrument at baseline, post treatment, and 3 months' follow-up. We conducted mixed model analyses of variance with linear contrasts to estimate (1) within-group changes in QoL from baseline to post treatment and from post treatment to 3 months' follow-up and (2) between-group differences in changes in QoL from baseline to post treatment and from post treatment to 3 months' follow-up. RESULTS: We found significant within-group improvements from baseline to post treatment among RT survivors for physical health QoL (mean difference 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-3.06; p = 0.012), environmental QoL (mean difference 1.29; 95% CI 0.21-2.36; p = 0.020), general QoL (mean difference 0.55; 95% CI 0.13-0.973; p = 0.011), and QoL satisfaction (mean difference 0.87; 95% CI 0.36-1.37; p = 0.001), and those improvements sustained through the 3-month follow-up. We found no significant between-group improvements for survivors or caregivers from baseline to post treatment or from post treatment to 3 months' follow-up for any QoL variables (i.e., domains, general QoL, and QoL satisfaction together). CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study, we found improved QoL among survivors, but not in caregivers, who received RT and improvements sustained over time. These RT-related improvements were not significantly greater than those observed in the control. Results support a fully powered randomized controlled trial to allow for a definitive evaluation of RT-related effects among dyads of survivors of acute brain injury and their caregivers.
BACKGROUND: Neuro-ICU hospitalization for an acute neurological illness is often traumatic and associated with heightened emotional distress and reduced quality of life (QoL) for both survivors and their informal caregivers (i.e., family and friends providing unpaid care). In a pilot study, we previously showed that a dyadic (survivor and caregiver together) resiliency intervention (Recovering Together [RT]) was feasible and associated with sustained improvement in emotional distress when compared with an attention placebo educational control. Here we report on changes in secondary outcomes assessing QoL. METHODS: Survivors (n = 58) and informal caregivers (n = 58) completed assessments at bedside and were randomly assigned to participate together as a dyad in the RT or control intervention (both 6 weeks, two in-person sessions at bedside and four sessions via live video post discharge). We measured QoL domain scores (physical health, psychological, social relations, and environmental), general QoL, and QoL satisfaction using the World Health Organization Quality of Life Abbreviated Instrument at baseline, post treatment, and 3 months' follow-up. We conducted mixed model analyses of variance with linear contrasts to estimate (1) within-group changes in QoL from baseline to post treatment and from post treatment to 3 months' follow-up and (2) between-group differences in changes in QoL from baseline to post treatment and from post treatment to 3 months' follow-up. RESULTS: We found significant within-group improvements from baseline to post treatment among RT survivors for physical health QoL (mean difference 1.73; 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.39-3.06; p = 0.012), environmental QoL (mean difference 1.29; 95% CI 0.21-2.36; p = 0.020), general QoL (mean difference 0.55; 95% CI 0.13-0.973; p = 0.011), and QoL satisfaction (mean difference 0.87; 95% CI 0.36-1.37; p = 0.001), and those improvements sustained through the 3-month follow-up. We found no significant between-group improvements for survivors or caregivers from baseline to post treatment or from post treatment to 3 months' follow-up for any QoL variables (i.e., domains, general QoL, and QoL satisfaction together). CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study, we found improved QoL among survivors, but not in caregivers, who received RT and improvements sustained over time. These RT-related improvements were not significantly greater than those observed in the control. Results support a fully powered randomized controlled trial to allow for a definitive evaluation of RT-related effects among dyads of survivors of acute brain injury and their caregivers.
Authors: Emma E Meyers; Kelly M Shaffer; Melissa Gates; Ann Lin; Jonathan Rosand; Ana-Maria Vranceanu Journal: Psychosomatics Date: 2019-12-04 Impact factor: 2.386
Authors: Ivo W Soliman; Dylan W de Lange; Linda M Peelen; Olaf L Cremer; Arjen J C Slooter; Wietze Pasma; Jozef Kesecioglu; Diederik van Dijk Journal: J Crit Care Date: 2014-09-22 Impact factor: 3.425
Authors: Karmel W Choi; Kelly M Shaffer; Emily L Zale; Christopher J Funes; Karestan C Koenen; Tara Tehan; Jonathan Rosand; Ana-Maria Vranceanu Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2018-05 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Emma Meyers; Ann Lin; Ethan Lester; Kelly Shaffer; Jonathan Rosand; Ana-Maria Vranceanu Journal: Gen Hosp Psychiatry Date: 2019-12-20 Impact factor: 3.238
Authors: Ilse van Beusekom; Ferishta Bakhshi-Raiez; Nicolette F de Keizer; Marike van der Schaaf; Fabian Termorshuizen; Dave A Dongelmans Journal: PLoS One Date: 2019-05-23 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ilse van Beusekom; Ferishta Bakhshi-Raiez; Nicolette F de Keizer; Dave A Dongelmans; Marike van der Schaaf Journal: Crit Care Date: 2016-01-21 Impact factor: 9.097