Feasibility of a Telephone Intervention for HIV Patients and Their Informal Caregivers

Telephone interventions, delivered by healthcare professionals, for providing education and psychosocial support for informal caregivers of adults with diagnosed illnesses

BACKGROUND

Maintaining care for ill persons in the community is heavily dependent on support from unpaid caregivers. Many caregivers, however, find themselves in a caring role for which they are ill prepared and may require professional support. The telephone is an easily accessible method of providing support irrespective of geographical location.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of this review was to evaluate the effectiveness of telephone support interventions, delivered by healthcare professionals, when compared to usual care or non-telephone-based support interventions for providing education and psychosocial support for informal caregivers of people with acute and chronic diagnosed illnesses, and to evaluate the cost-effectiveness of telephone interventions in this population.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the following databases from inception to 16 November 2018: the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL); MEDLINE; Embase; PsycINFO; ProQuest Dissertations and Theses A&I; and CINAHL Complete. We also searched 11 caregiver-specific websites, three conference links, and two clinical trial registries.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) (including cluster-RCTs) and quasi-RCTs. We excluded cross-over trials because of the high risk of carry-over effects from one intervention to another.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two authors independently screened citations against the review's inclusion criteria, extracted data, and assessed the included studies using the Cochrane 'Risk of bias' tool. The review's prespecified primary (quality of life and burden) and secondary outcomes (skill acquisition, psychological health, knowledge, health status and well-being, family functioning, satisfaction, and economic outcomes), where reported, were assessed at the end of intervention delivery and at short-term (≤ 3 months), medium-term (> 3 to ≤ 6 months) and longer-term time points (> 6 to 12 months) following the intervention. Where possible, meta-analyses were conducted, otherwise results were reported narratively.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 21 randomised studies involving 1,690 caregivers; 19 studies compared telephone support interventions and usual care, of which 18 contributed data to the analyses. Two studies compared telephone and non-telephone professional support interventions. Caregiver ages ranged from 19 years to 87 years across studies. The majority of participants were female (> 70.53%), with two trials including females only. Most caregivers were family members, educated beyond secondary or high school level or had the equivalent in years of education. All caregivers were based in the community. Overall risk of bias was high for most studies.The results demonstrated that there is probably little or no difference between telephone support interventions and usual care for the primary outcome of quality of life at the end of intervention (SMD -0.02, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.19, 4 studies, 364 caregivers) (moderate-certainty evidence) or burden at the end of intervention (SMD -0.11, 95% CI -0.30 to 0.07, 9 studies, 788 caregivers) (low-certainty evidence). For one study where quality of life at the end of intervention was reported narratively, the findings indicated that a telephone support intervention may result in slightly higher quality of life, compared with usual care. Two further studies on caregiver burden were reported narratively; one reported that telephone support interventions may decrease burden, the other reported no change in the intervention group, compared with usual care.We are uncertain about the effects of telephone support interventions on caregiver depression at the end of intervention (SMD -0.37, 95% CI -0.70 to -0.05, 9 studies, 792 caregivers) due to very low-certainty evidence for this outcome. Depression was reported narratively for three studies. One reported that the intervention may reduce caregiver depression at the end of intervention, but this effect was not sustained at short-term follow-up. The other two studies reported there may be little or no difference between telephone support and usual care for depression at the end of intervention. Six studies measured satisfaction with the intervention but did not report comparative data. All six reported high satisfaction scores with the intervention. No adverse events, including suicide or suicide ideation, were measured or reported by any of the included studies.Our analysis indicated that caregiver anxiety may be slightly reduced (MD -6.0, 95% CI -11.68 to -0.32, 1 study, 61 caregivers) and preparedness to care slightly improved (SMD 0.37, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.64, 2 studies, 208 caregivers) at the end of intervention, following telephone-only support interventions compared to usual care. Findings indicated there may be little or no difference between telephone support interventions and usual care for all of the following outcomes at the end of intervention: problem-solving, social activity, caregiver competence, coping, stress, knowledge, physical health, self-efficacy, family functioning, and satisfaction with supports (practical or social). There may also be little or no effect of telephone support interventions for quality of life and burden at short-term follow-up or for burden and depression at medium-term follow-up.Litttle or no difference was found between groups for any of the reported outcomes in studies comparing telephone and non-telephone professional support interventions. We are uncertain as to the effects of telephone support interventions compared to non-telephone support interventions for caregiver burden and depression at the end of intervention. No study reported on quality of life or satisfaction with the intervention and no adverse events were reported or noted in the two studies reporting on this comparison.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Although our review indicated slight benefit may exist for telephone support interventions on some outcomes (e.g. anxiety and preparedness to care at the end of intervention), for most outcomes, including the primary outcomes, telephone-only interventions may have little or no effect on caregiver outcomes compared to usual care. The findings of the review were mainly based on studies with overall high risk of bias, and few participants. Further high-quality trials, with larger sample sizes are required.

Telephone consultation for improving health of people living with or at risk of HIV: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Low cost, effective interventions are needed to deal with the major global burden of HIV/AIDS. Telephone consultation offers the potential to improve health of people living with HIV/AIDS cost-effectively and to reduce the burden on affected people and health systems. The aim of this systematic review was to assess the effectiveness of telephone consultation for HIV/AIDS care.

METHODS

We undertook a comprehensive search of peer-reviewed and grey literature. Two authors independently screened citations, extracted data and assessed the quality of randomized controlled trials which compared telephone interventions with control groups for HIV/AIDS care. Telephone interventions were voice calls with landlines or mobile phones. We present a narrative overview of the results as the obtained trials were highly heterogeneous in design and therefore the data could not be pooled for statistical analysis.

RESULTS

The search yielded 3321 citations. Of these, nine studies involving 1162 participants met the inclusion criteria. The telephone was used for giving HIV test results (one trial) and for delivering behavioural interventions aimed at improving mental health (four trials), reducing sexual transmission risk (one trial), improving medication adherence (two trials) and smoking cessation (one trial). Limited effectiveness of the intervention was found in the trial giving HIV test results, in one trial supporting medication adherence and in one trial for smoking cessation by telephone.

CONCLUSIONS

We found some evidence of the benefits of interventions delivered by telephone for the health of people living with HIV or at risk of HIV. However, only limited conclusions can be drawn as we only found nine studies for five different interventions and they mainly took place in the United States. Nevertheless, given the high penetration of low-cost mobile phones in countries with high HIV endemicity, more evidence is needed on how telephone consultation can aid in the delivery of HIV prevention, treatment and care.

Gender, drug use, and perceived social support among HIV positive patients

We investigated the relationships among gender, drug use, and perceived social support in 176 HIV positive patients recruited with their informal caregivers in HIV clinics. Perceived caregiver support, emotional support, tangible support, and conflict were assessed. Current drug use was defined as heroin and/or cocaine use within 6 months prior to baseline. Gender was not significantly associated with any of the four outcomes. Current drug users reported significantly higher conflict in social relationships than nonusers, but was not significantly associated with the other three outcomes. However, significant heroin/cocaine use by gender interactions were observed; specifically, the negative associations between current drug use and perceived caregiver and emotional support were stronger among females than males. We concluded that recent heroin/cocaine use may be associated with dissatisfaction in perceived social support from most sources, with the strongest relationships amongst drug using females.