A psycho-educational intervention for family caregivers of patients receiving palliative care: a randomized controlled trial

Effect of Education on Symptom Management and Control in Cancer Patients Receiving Palliative Care

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to investigate the effect of an educational intervention on cancer patients receiving palliative care and their caregivers concerning symptom management and family needs.

METHODS

This study involved 120 participants-60 cancer patients and their respective caregivers-divided into intervention and control groups. Over a 2-week period, the intervention group received a comprehensive educational program focusing on symptom management, while the control group did not receive any educational intervention. The Edmonton Symptom Assessment System (ESAS) and Palliative Performance Scale (PPS) were used to assess patients' symptoms, their intensity, and performance, while the Family Need Scale (FNS) was utilized to evaluate caregivers' needs. These assessments were conducted at the beginning and end of the study. Primary outcomes focused on symptom assessment using ESAS and PPS, along with evaluating caregivers' needs through FNS. Secondary outcomes involved assessing participant satisfaction with the intervention.

RESULTS

At the end of the study, comparing initial and second evaluations, both ESAS and PPS scores significantly increased in the intervention and control groups (p = .003, p = .002, respectively). Additionally, a statistically significant decrease in the severity of symptoms, except for lethargy/hypokinesis, was observed in the intervention group compared to the control group. The FNS scale indicated that family needs satisfaction was higher in the intervention group compared to the control group. The data obtained demonstrated that there was a reduction the pain, fatigue, depression, anxiety, drowsiness, and shortness of breath levels in the intervention group compared to the control group, but there was no significant difference other than these symptoms.

CONCLUSIONS

The educational intervention positively impacted symptom management and family needs. Optimizing symptom control would greatly benefit palliative care patients and their caregivers.

Psychological interventions to enhance positive outcomes in adult cancer caregivers: A systematic review

This systematic review aims to examine the characteristics of psychological interventions that aim to enhance positive outcomes, such as wellbeing, post-traumatic growth, or hope in cancer caregivers. Studies published until December 2023 were searched on PubMed, Scopus, PsycINFO, WOS, PsycARTICLES and were included when examining interventions targeting positive outcomes with adult cancer caregivers. Of the 1424 articles retrieved through the databases, 16 studies were eligible for inclusion in this review, targeting 908 caregivers (70.2% female; Mage = 53.5). A narrative synthesis was used to describe the interventions, which were based on a variety of approaches such as psychoeducation, mindfulness, or Existential Behavioral Therapy, and reported positive gains for the positive outcomes. The results show few randomized controlled trials published to date, highlight the contrast between the focus shift towards these outcomes and the need for systematic testing of the interventions, to be able to inform evidence-based service delivery.

A Mobile Instant Messaging-Delivered Psychoeducational Intervention for Cancer Caregivers: A Randomized Clinical Trial

Importance

Psychoeducational interventions (PEIs), which provide both information and emotional and psychosocial support, may address the unmet needs of the caregivers of adolescent and young adult patients with cancer.

Objective

To explore the effects of an instant messaging-delivered PEI on anxiety, depression, quality of life (QOL), and coping and determine whether the intervention reduces caregivers' unmet needs.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This randomized clinical trial using an intention-to-treat protocol was conducted from April 1 to September 14, 2022, in a tertiary cancer hospital in China and included caregivers of patients diagnosed with cancer at age 15 to 39 years recruited using convenience sampling.

Intervention

Caregivers were allocated 1:1 using a randomized block scheme to the intervention or control group. The intervention group received a 5-week PEI and usual care, whereas the control group received only usual care. The PEI was delivered through articles and calls through an instant messaging application.

Main Outcomes and Measures

The primary outcomes were changes in the levels of caregivers' anxiety and depression, measured using the 7-Item Generalized Anxiety Disorder Scale and the Patient Health Questionnaire 9, respectively. The secondary outcomes were changes in the levels of caregivers' QOL, coping, and unmet needs.

Results

Of the 160 participants, 92 (57.5%) were male; mean (SD) age was 40.27 (8.33) years. Compared with the control group, the intervention group had significantly greater reduction in severity of anxiety (B = -3.231; 95% CI, -4.746 to -1.716; P < .001) and depression (B = -3.253; 95% CI, -5.052 to -1.454; P < .001), smaller reduction in QOL (B = 13.574; 95% CI, 0.488-26.661; P = .04), and greater reduction in unmet needs (B = -12.136; 95% CI, -18.307 to -5.965; P < .001) after the intervention. Twelve weeks after baseline, the intervention group demonstrated a significantly greater reduction only in severity of anxiety (B = -1.890; 95% CI, -3.382 to -0.397; P = .01).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this randomized clinical trial of a mobile instant messaging-delivered PEI, caregivers' unmet needs, anxiety, and depression decreased significantly and QOL declined at a significantly slower rate immediately after the intervention in the intervention group compared with the control group. A sustained effect on anxiety was observed 12 weeks after baseline.

Trial Registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry identifier: ChiCTR2200055951.

Comparison of palliative care education for family caregivers in high-and-low-income countries: An integrative review

Background

In most resource-limited countries, palliative care is still under development. Despite the differences, the involvement of family caregivers is fundamental in both High-Income Countries (HICs) and Low-Income Countries (LICs). The lack of formal support in LICs implies that educational interventions to support family caregivers in this region could be more complex and urgently needed than in HICs. To comprehend the existing situation and identify the gaps in LICs, using HICs as a benchmark standard and conducting a review comparing educational interventions in both regions is essential.

Objective

To identify and compare the existing implementation of education for family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer in LICs and HICs.

Design

An integrative review guideline by Whittemore and Knafl was followed. Interventional studies related to education for family caregivers providing care for adult patients with cancer were included, and review articles were excluded.

Data Sources

Data were obtained from PubMed, EBSCO, ProQuest, and ClinicalKey. The search was conducted on 18 November 2021 and updated on 9 August 2023.

Review methods

Data reduction, data comparison, conclusion drawing, and data verification were conducted.

Results

Out of the 11 studies included, nine were randomized controlled trials, and two were quasi-experimental studies. Among them, seven (63%) were conducted in HICs, and four (37%) were carried out in LICs. In both regions, the psychological aspect was the most commonly addressed subject in palliative care education for family caregivers. However, in LICs, no articles specifically addressed the social and spiritual aspects of family caregivers' education. Research conducted in LICs mostly involved nurses, while studies in HICs included a more diverse range of healthcare professionals. Typically, these programs required two to three sessions, with 30-60 minutes duration for 3-12 weeks.

Conclusion

The social and spiritual aspects can be integrated into family caregivers' training programs in LICs in the near future. Nurses, as an integral part of the multidisciplinary team, are capable of contributing to the development of educational programs for family caregivers, especially in resource-limited countries where patients rely heavily on their caregivers and relatives. Support from nurses is fundamental in such contexts.

Interventions to improve outcomes for caregivers of patients with advanced cancer: a meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Family caregivers of patients with advanced cancer often have poor quality of life (QOL) and mental health. We examined the effectiveness of interventions offering support for caregivers of patients with advanced cancer on caregiver QOL and mental health outcomes.

METHODS

We searched Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL, and Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature databases from inception through June 2021. Eligible studies reported on randomized controlled trials for adult caregivers of adult patients with advanced cancer. Meta-analysis was conducted for primary outcomes of QOL, physical well-being, mental well-being, anxiety, and depression, from baseline to follow-up of 1-3 months; secondary endpoints were these outcomes at 4-6 months and additional caregiver burden, self-efficacy, family functioning, and bereavement outcomes. Random effects models were used to generate summary standardized mean differences (SMD).

RESULTS

Of 12 193 references identified, 56 articles reporting on 49 trials involving 8554 caregivers were eligible for analysis; 16 (33%) targeted caregivers, 19 (39%) patient-caregiver dyads, and 14 (29%) patients and their families. At 1- to 3-month follow-up, interventions had a statistically significant effect on overall QOL (SMD = 0.24, 95% confidence interval [CI] = 0.10 to 0.39); I2 = 52.0%), mental well-being (SMD = 0.14, 95% CI = 0.02 to 0.25; I2 = 0.0%), anxiety (SMD = 0.27, 95% CI = 0.06 to 0.49; I2 = 74.0%), and depression (SMD = 0.34, 95% CI = 0.16 to 0.52; I2 = 64.4) compared with standard care. In narrative synthesis, interventions demonstrated improvements in caregiver self-efficacy and grief.

CONCLUSIONS

Interventions targeting caregivers, dyads, or patients and families led to improvements in caregiver QOL and mental health. These data support the routine provision of interventions to improve well-being in caregivers of patients with advanced cancer.

The Feasibility and Acceptability of a Needs-Oriented Psychoeducational Intervention Among Caregivers of Adolescent and Young Adult Cancer Patients: A Pilot Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Little is known about the psychoeducational interventions for caregivers of adolescent and young adult (AYA) cancer patients.

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the feasibility and acceptability of a needs-oriented psychoeducational intervention among caregivers of AYA cancer patients.

METHODS

In this 2-arm (parallel-group), pilot randomized controlled trial, participants were randomized to the intervention or control group. Participants in the control group received usual care, whereas those in the intervention group received a needs-oriented psychoeducational intervention via WeChat as well as the usual care. Feasibility was evaluated on recruitment, attrition, and adherence rates and the data collection process. Acceptability was assessed based on participants' satisfaction with and perceived usefulness of the intervention, collected using a questionnaire. In addition, a semistructured interview was conducted to explore their experiences.

RESULTS

Twenty-four caregivers of AYA cancer patients were recruited, with a consent rate of 61.5%. The attrition and response rates 5 weeks after baseline were 8.3% and 91.7%. Among the 12 participants in the intervention group, 10 (83.3%) completed all of the 5 weekly sessions. Most of the participants were satisfied with the program and perceived its usefulness. The semistructured interviews revealed 3 major categories: facilitators of participation, perception of the intervention, and perceived benefits.

CONCLUSIONS

The needs-oriented psychoeducational intervention delivered through WeChat is feasible for and acceptable to caregivers of AYA cancer patients. A full-scale study is warranted to examine the effects of this intervention on caregivers' health outcomes.

IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE

The WeChat-based, needs-oriented psychoeducational intervention may be beneficial to improve caregivers' health outcomes.

The effectiveness of psychoeducational interventions on caregiver-oriented outcomes in caregivers of adult cancer patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVE

Cancer caregiving can result in increased psychosocial distress and poor health-related quality of life (QOL). Psychoeducation has been shown to be effective in enhancing caregiving-oriented outcomes. A systematic assessment of the overall effect of psychoeducational intervention (PEI) and identification of individual intervention characteristics that may contribute to the effectiveness of PEI is needed.

METHODS

For this meta-analysis, relevant articles were identified through electronic databases using key search terms and their medical subject heading such as "family caregiver," "cancer," and "psychoeducational intervention."

RESULTS

Twenty-eight controlled trials with 3876 participants were included. PEIs had beneficial effect on depression (Standardized Mean Difference [SMD] -0.26; 95% CI = -0.50 to -0.01, p < 0.04), anxiety (SMD -0.41; 95% CI = -0.82 to 0.01, p < 0.05), caregiver burden (SMD -0.84; 95% CI = -1.22 to -0.46, p < 0.0001) and QOL (SMD 0.59, 95% CI 0.24-0.93; p < 0.0009) at the immediate post-intervention period. At longer-term follow-up, the effectiveness of PEI was maintained on QOL (SMD 0.39, 95% CI = -0.00 to -0.77, p < 0.05), and anxiety (SMD -0.57; 95% CI = -1.09 to -0.06, p < 0.03). Moderation analysis showed that intervention characteristics such as studies conducted in high-income countries, group intervention and studies that focused on specific and mixed cancers explain some of the high variations observed among the included studies.

CONCLUSIONS

PEI may benefit caregivers of cancer patients through the significant effects on caregiver burden, QOL, anxiety, and depression. The findings from the moderation analysis may be important for the design of future interventions.

Caregivers’ Experience of End-of-Life Stage Elderly Patients: Longitudinal Qualitative Interview

Objectives: This study seeks to provide an understanding of the changing experiences in caregivers of end-of-life patients in Hong Kong through exploring their caregiving journey. Methods: Using longitudinal individual qualitative interviews, a total of 14 caregivers of community-dwelling elderly patients receiving end-of-life care were recruited between 2015 and 2016. A series of in-depth interviews and observations were conducted in 14 cases during the end-of-life journey. Results: A thematic analysis revealed four sequential experiential stages, abbreviated as “CAPE” that caregivers confronted: Stage 1 Certainty, (1a) lack of certainty regarding the progression of decline at the end-stage of life (1b) feelings of despair as patients’ function decreased; Stage 2 Ambivalence, (2a) feelings of ambivalence after decisions were made regarding EOL care, (2b) struggle over care responsibility within families; Stage 3 Perturbed, (3a) varied in quality of EOL care, (3b) depressed mood arisen from frequent exposure to the suffering of elderly patients; and Stage 4 Expectation, (4a) losing the caregiving role as patients showing signs of imminent death. Conclusions: These findings increase our understanding of caregivers’ in-depth experience over time that arise within the structural context of end-of-life care. Our data highlights the need for end of life related knowledge and information, provision of a caring atmosphere and communication, and professional-led detachment in creating caregiving-friendly service in healthcare system, thus as to provide support and alleviate stress for caregivers with their critical responsibility and role during the course of end-of-life care.

Effectiveness of caregiver interventions for people with cancer and non-cancer-related chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

People with chronic pain frequently have difficulties in completing everyday tasks to maintain independence and quality of life. Informal caregivers may provide support to these individuals. However, the effectiveness of interventions to train and support these individuals in caregiving remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the evidence to determine the effectiveness of caregiver interventions to support informal caregivers of people with chronic pain.

METHODS

A systematic review of published and unpublished literature databases was undertaken (9 April 2021). Trials reporting clinical outcomes of caregiver interventions to train informal caregivers to support community-dwelling people with chronic pain were included. Meta-analysis was undertaken and each outcome was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation.

RESULTS

Twenty-seven studies were eligible (N = 3427 patients). Twenty-four studies assessed patients with cancer pain and three with musculoskeletal pain. No other patient groups were identified. There was very low-quality evidence that caregiver interventions were beneficial for caregiver health-related quality of life (standardised mean difference = 0.26, 95% confidence interval = 0.01 to 0.52; N = 231). There was moderate-quality evidence that caregiving interventions were effective in reducing pain in the short-term (standardised mean difference = 0.16, 95% confidence interval = -0.29 to -0.03). There was low-quality evidence that caregiving interventions had no beneficial effect over usual care for psychological outcomes, fatigue, coping or physical function in the long-term.

CONCLUSION

Caregiving interventions may be effective for patients and caregivers but only in the shorter-term and for a limited number of outcomes. There is insufficient evidence examining the effectiveness of caregiver interventions for people with non-cancer-related pain.

A meta-analysis of the effects of cognitive behavioral therapy on quality of life and negative emotions of informal cancer caregivers

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to systematically review the effect of cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT) in terms of improving the quality of life (QOL) and negative emotion of informal cancer caregivers.

METHODS

PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, Web of Science, MEDLINE, China National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), and China Biology Medicine disc (CBMdisc) were searched from the database establishment to October 2021. Literature screening, data extraction, and quality evaluation were conducted based on inclusion and exclusion criteria. Stata 14.0 software was used for data analysis.

RESULTS

A total of 17 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) involving 2,348 cancer informal caregivers (CGs) were included in this study, with an overall loss rate of 13.3%. Meta-analysis showed no statistically significant difference in the impact of CBT on QOL (SMD = 0.28, 95%CI: -0.09-0.65, P < 0.001). However, the improvement of depression in CBT intervention group was significantly better than that in control group (SMD = -0.32, 95%CI: -0.56 to -0.07, P = 0.010). The HADS subgroup showed differences in depression scores (SMD = -0.80, 95%CI: -1.30 to -0.29, P = 0.002). The overall effect of CBT on anxiety was statistically different, the improvement of anxiety in CBT intervention group was significantly better than that in control group (SMD = -0.36, 95%CI: -0.720-0.004, P = 0.047).

CONCLUSIONS

CBT had a positive effect on reducing depression and anxiety in informal cancer caregivers, and the effect on quality of life was not statistically significant, but showed a positive trend.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

https://inplasy.com/generate-invoice/, identifier: INPLASY202230120.

Interventions to Improve the Preparedness to Care for Family Caregivers of Cancer Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

Background

Preparedness for caregiving could balance the negative impacts of caregiving. The interventions aimed at increasing readiness among the caregivers are important during the illness period for both patients and their caregivers.

Objectives

The aims of this study were to review the interventions applied to the caregivers of cancer patients and to examine the effects of these interventions on the preparedness to care.

Methods

The ScienceDirect, Scopus, CENTRAL, Web of Science, MEDLINE, and PubMed were searched for relevant studies published between 2000 and 2020. The methodological quality was assessed using the Quality Assessment Tool for Quantitative Studies. The statistical analyses were performed using the Comprehensive Meta-Analysis software version 3.0. The publication bias was assessed using the Egger test, for funnel plots.

Results

Eleven studies were selected for the meta-analysis, including those about psychoeducation programs (n = 5), education programs (n = 3), supportive programs (n = 2), and a self-care support program for the caregivers (n = 1). The methodological quality assessment revealed 2 studies as “strong.” The results indicated an increase in the caregivers’ preparedness to care after the interventions. The subgroup analysis revealed that the programs with higher ratios of female caregivers were more effective.

Conclusion

The interventions applied to the family caregivers can exert beneficial effects on caregivers’ preparedness to care. Nonetheless, future studies should focus on methodological issues, such as randomization and blinding.

Implications for Practice

Nurse-driven interventions may be used as a useful strategy to improve the preparedness to care among the caregivers of cancer patients. The male caregivers should be closely followed by healthcare professionals for knowledge and support needs.

Caring for people who take care: What is already done?

Objective

The growing prevalence and impact of cancer on the family system calls for a palliative care approach with the family as the unit of care. This study aimed at providing an overview of the intervention programs that have been developed to offer support to the family caregivers of oncologic patients receiving palliative care.

Method

Sixteen articles were included in the final review, encompassing (i) studies focused on intervention programs with family caregivers of cancer patients in palliative care, (ii) studies including a pre- and post-test evaluation of the intervention program, (iii) and studies whose cancer patients were at least 18 years old.

Results

A great heterogeneity was verified with respect to care settings, number of sessions, outcome measures, or timing of assessment within the reviewed programs. These findings mirrored the complexity of the palliative care approach, which is difficult to standardize. Nonetheless, some interventions with different features accomplished good and sometimes similar results. The studies’ main outcomes were clustered in five categories: psychological symptomatology, general quality of life, caregiving role, family relational variables, and bereavement/grief. Moreover, 44% of the main outcomes were psychological symptomatology of family caregivers, with an emphasis toward anxiety and depression. Also shown was a growing emergence of technology use among these interventions.

Significance of results

Results revealed a scarcity of family-oriented programs and lack of certified mental health professionals as interventionists. Future studies and interventions should focus on the positive outcomes of the caregiving experience and must acknowledge the cultural differences when trying to replicate programs. Considering that there is no precise formula for dealing with terminal illness and grief, we submit that family-centered and systemic lenses are excellent approaches for support during this adjustment process. In conclusion, the present study advocates for increased investment in the field, underscoring the importance of family caregivers’ mental health.

Hospital-based specialist palliative care compared with usual care for adults with advanced illness and their caregivers: a systematic review

Background

Most deaths still take place in hospital; cost-effective commissioning of end-of-life resources is a priority. This review provides clarity on the effectiveness of hospital-based specialist palliative care.

Objectives

The objectives were to assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of hospital-based specialist palliative care.

Population

Adult patients with advanced illnesses and their unpaid caregivers.

Intervention

Hospital-based specialist palliative care.

Comparators

Inpatient or outpatient hospital care without specialist palliative care input at the point of entry to the study, or community care or hospice care provided outside the hospital setting (usual care).

Primary outcomes

Patient health-related quality of life and symptom burden.

Data sources

Six databases (The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO and CareSearch), clinical trial registers, reference lists and systematic reviews were searched to August 2019.

Review methods

Two independent reviewers screened, data extracted and assessed methodological quality. Meta-analysis was carried out using RevMan (The Cochrane Collaboration, The Nordic Cochrane Centre, Copenhagen, Denmark), with separate synthesis of qualitative data.

Results

Forty-two randomised controlled trials involving 7779 participants (6678 patients and 1101 unpaid caregivers) were included. Diagnoses of participants were as follows: cancer, 21 studies; non-cancer, 14 studies; and mixed cancer and non-cancer, seven studies. Hospital-based specialist palliative care was offered in the following models: ward based (one study), inpatient consult (10 studies), outpatient (six studies), hospital at home or hospital outreach (five studies) and multiple settings that included hospital (20 studies). Meta-analyses demonstrated significant improvement favouring hospital-based specialist palliative care over usual care in patient health-related quality of life (10 studies, standardised mean difference 0.26, 95% confidence interval 0.15 to 0.37; I 2 = 3%) and patient satisfaction with care (two studies, standardised mean difference 0.36, 95% confidence interval 0.14 to 0.57; I 2 = 0%), a significant reduction in patient symptom burden (six studies, standardised mean difference –0.26, 95% confidence interval –0.41 to –0.12; I 2 = 0%) and patient depression (eight studies, standardised mean difference –0.22, 95% confidence interval –0.34 to –0.10; I 2 = 0%), and a significant increase in the chances of patients dying in their preferred place (measured by number of patients with home death) (seven studies, odds ratio 1.63, 95% confidence interval 1.23 to 2.16; I 2 = 0%). There were non-significant improvements in pain (four studies, standardised mean difference –0.16, 95% confidence interval –0.33 to 0.01; I 2 = 0%) and patient anxiety (five studies, mean difference –0.63, 95% confidence interval –2.22 to 0.96; I 2 = 76%). Hospital-based specialist palliative care showed no evidence of causing serious harm. The evidence on mortality/survival and cost-effectiveness was inconclusive. Qualitative studies (10 studies, 322 participants) suggested that hospital-based specialist palliative care was beneficial as it ensured personalised and holistic care for patients and their families, while also fostering open communication, shared decision-making and respectful and compassionate care.

Limitation

In almost half of the included randomised controlled trials, there was palliative care involvement in the control group.

Conclusions

Hospital-based specialist palliative care may offer benefits for person-centred outcomes including health-related quality of life, symptom burden, patient depression and satisfaction with care, while also increasing the chances of patients dying in their preferred place (measured by home death) with little evidence of harm.

Future work

More studies are needed of populations with non-malignant diseases, different models of hospital-based specialist palliative care, and cost-effectiveness.

Study registration

This study is registered as PROSPERO CRD42017083205.

Funding

This project was funded by the National Institute for Health Research (NIHR) Health Services and Delivery Research programme and will be published in full in Health Services and Delivery Research; Vol. 9, No. 12. See the NIHR Journals Library website for further project information.

Self-efficacy in caregivers of adults diagnosed with cancer: An integrative review

PURPOSE

Cancer caregivers experience health challenges related to their caregiving role, and self-efficacy can contribute to health outcomes through behavioral, environmental, and personal factors. The purpose of this integrative review was to examine self-efficacy in caregivers of adults diagnosed with cancer, including its association with health factors.

METHOD

A systematic search of PubMed, CINAHL, and PsychInfo yielded 560 articles. Following duplicate removal, 232 articles were screened for inclusion criteria with 71 articles remaining for final review.

RESULTS

Studies were generally quantitative (n = 67), with predominantly female (n = 55), White (n = 36) caregivers, between the ages of 45-60 (n = 48). Self-efficacy was significantly associated with quality of life, caregiver function, social support, hope, depression, anxiety, and burden as a predictor, mediator, and outcome. Physical health and social determinants of health (social support and financial well-being) were addressed among fewer studies than mental and emotional health outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Addressing self-efficacy in diverse populations and within physical, mental, and social health contexts will enhance understanding of how self-efficacy impacts caregivers of adults diagnosed with cancer. Nurses and other health care professionals can then effectively address supportive needs of caregivers in the personal, behavioral, and environmental domains.

A technology-enhanced model of care for transitional palliative care versus attention control for adult family caregivers in rural or medically underserved areas: study protocol for a randomized controlled trial

Background

Transitioning care from hospital to home is associated with risks of adverse events and poor continuity of care. These transitions are even more challenging when new approaches to care, such as palliative care, are introduced before discharge. Family caregivers (FCGs) are expected to navigate these transitions while also managing care. In addition to extensive caregiving responsibilities, FCGs often have their own health needs that can inhibit their ability to provide care. Those living in rural areas have even fewer resources to meet their self-care and caregiving needs. The purpose of this study is to test the efficacy and cost-effectiveness of an intervention to improve FCGs’ health and well-being. The intervention uses video visits to teach, guide, and counsel FCGs in rural areas during hospital-to-home transitions. The intervention is based on evidence of transitional and palliative care principles, which are individualized to improve continuity of care, provide caregiver support, enhance knowledge and skills, and attend to caregivers’ health needs. It aims to test whether usual care practices are similar to this technology-enhanced intervention in (1) caregiving skills (e.g., caregiving preparedness, communication with clinicians, and satisfaction with care), (2) FCG health outcomes (e.g., quality of life, burden, coping skills, depression), and (3) cost. We describe the rationale for targeting rural caregivers, the methods for the study and intervention, and the analysis plan to test the intervention’s effect.

Methods

The study uses a randomized controlled trial design, with FCGs assigned to the control condition or the caregiver intervention by computer-generated lists. The intervention period continues for 8 weeks after care recipients are discharged from the hospital. Data are collected at baseline, 2 weeks, 8 weeks, and 6 months. Time and monetary costs from a societal perspective are captured monthly.

Discussion

This study addresses 2 independent yet interrelated health care foci—transitional care and palliative care—by testing an intervention to extend palliative care practice and improve transition management for caregivers of seriously ill patients in rural areas. The comprehensive cost assessment will quantify the commitment and financial burden of FCGs.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03339271. Registered on 13 November 2017.

Protocol version: 11.

Supplementary information

Supplementary information accompanies this paper at 10.1186/s13063-020-04806-0.

The effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of hospital-based specialist palliative care for adults with advanced illness and their caregivers

BACKGROUND

Serious illness is often characterised by physical/psychological problems, family support needs, and high healthcare resource use. Hospital-based specialist palliative care (HSPC) has developed to assist in better meeting the needs of patients and their families and potentially reducing hospital care expenditure. There is a need for clarity on the effectiveness and optimal models of HSPC, given that most people still die in hospital and also to allocate scarce resources judiciously.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of HSPC compared to usual care for adults with advanced illness (hereafter patients) and their unpaid caregivers/families.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, CDSR, DARE and HTA database via the Cochrane Library; MEDLINE; Embase; CINAHL; PsycINFO; CareSearch; National Health Service Economic Evaluation Database (NHS EED) and two trial registers to August 2019, together with checking of reference lists and relevant systematic reviews, citation searching and contact with experts to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating the impact of HSPC on outcomes for patients or their unpaid caregivers/families, or both. HSPC was defined as specialist palliative care delivered by a palliative care team that is based in a hospital providing holistic care, co-ordination by a multidisciplinary team, and collaboration between HSPC providers and generalists. HSPC was provided to patients while they were admitted as inpatients to acute care hospitals, outpatients or patients receiving care from hospital outreach teams at home. The comparator was usual care, defined as inpatient or outpatient hospital care without specialist palliative care input at the point of entry into the study, community care or hospice care provided outside of the hospital setting.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane. We assessed risk of bias and extracted data. To account for use of different scales across studies, we calculated standardised mean differences (SMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for continuous data. We used an inverse variance random-effects model. For binary data, we calculated odds ratio (ORs) with 95% CIs. We assessed the evidence using GRADE and created a 'Summary of findings' table. Our primary outcomes were patient health-related quality of life (HRQoL) and symptom burden (a collection of two or more symptoms). Key secondary outcomes were pain, depression, satisfaction with care, achieving preferred place of death, mortality/survival, unpaid caregiver burden, and cost-effectiveness. Qualitative data was analysed where available.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 42 RCTs involving 7779 participants (6678 patients and 1101 caregivers/family members). Twenty-one studies were with cancer populations, 14 were with non-cancer populations (of which six were with heart failure patients), and seven with mixed cancer and non-cancer populations (mixed diagnoses). HSPC was offered in different ways and included the following models: ward-based, inpatient consult, outpatient, hospital-at-home or hospital outreach, and service provision across multiple settings which included hospital. For our main analyses, we pooled data from studies reporting adjusted endpoint values. Forty studies had a high risk of bias in at least one domain. Compared with usual care, HSPC improved patient HRQoL with a small effect size of 0.26 SMD over usual care (95% CI 0.15 to 0.37; I² = 3%, 10 studies, 1344 participants, low-quality evidence, higher scores indicate better patient HRQoL). HSPC also improved other person-centred outcomes. It reduced patient symptom burden with a small effect size of -0.26 SMD over usual care (95% CI -0.41 to -0.12; I² = 0%, 6 studies, 761 participants, very low-quality evidence, lower scores indicate lower symptom burden). HSPC improved patient satisfaction with care with a small effect size of 0.36 SMD over usual care (95% CI 0.41 to 0.57; I² = 0%, 2 studies, 337 participants, low-quality evidence, higher scores indicate better patient satisfaction with care). Using home death as a proxy measure for achieving patient's preferred place of death, patients were more likely to die at home with HSPC compared to usual care (OR 1.63, 95% CI 1.23 to 2.16; I² = 0%, 7 studies, 861 participants, low-quality evidence). Data on pain (4 studies, 525 participants) showed no evidence of a difference between HSPC and usual care (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.01; I² = 0%, very low-quality evidence). Eight studies (N = 1252 participants) reported on adverse events and very low-quality evidence did not demonstrate an effect of HSPC on serious harms. Two studies (170 participants) presented data on caregiver burden and both found no evidence of effect of HSPC (very low-quality evidence). We included 13 economic studies (2103 participants). Overall, the evidence on cost-effectiveness of HSPC compared to usual care was inconsistent among the four full economic studies. Other studies that used only partial economic analysis and those that presented more limited resource use and cost information also had inconsistent results (very low-quality evidence). Quality of the evidence The quality of the evidence assessed using GRADE was very low to low, downgraded due to a high risk of bias, inconsistency and imprecision.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Very low- to low-quality evidence suggests that when compared to usual care, HSPC may offer small benefits for several person-centred outcomes including patient HRQoL, symptom burden and patient satisfaction with care, while also increasing the chances of patients dying in their preferred place (measured by home death). While we found no evidence that HSPC causes serious harms, the evidence was insufficient to draw strong conclusions. Although these are only small effect sizes, they may be clinically relevant at an advanced stage of disease with limited prognosis, and are person-centred outcomes important to many patients and families. More well conducted studies are needed to study populations with non-malignant diseases and mixed diagnoses, ward-based models of HSPC, 24 hours access (out-of-hours care) as part of HSPC, pain, achieving patient preferred place of care, patient satisfaction with care, caregiver outcomes (satisfaction with care, burden, depression, anxiety, grief, quality of life), and cost-effectiveness of HSPC. In addition, research is needed to provide validated person-centred outcomes to be used across studies and populations.

Co-construction of the family-focused support conversation: a participatory learning and action research study to implement support for family members whose relatives are being discharged for end-of-life care at home or in a nursing home

BACKGROUND

Many people move in and out of hospital in the last few weeks of life. These care transitions can be distressing for family members because they signify the deterioration and impending death of their ill relative and forthcoming family bereavement. Whilst there is evidence about psychosocial support for family members providing end-of-life care at home, there is limited evidence about how this can be provided in acute hospitals during care transitions. Consequently, family members report a lack of support from hospital-based healthcare professionals.

METHODS

The aim of the study was to implement research evidence for family support at the end-of-life in acute hospital care. Informed by Participatory Learning and Action Research and Normalization Process Theory (NPT) we co-designed a context-specific intervention, the Family-Focused Support Conversation, from a detailed review of research evidence. We undertook a pilot implementation in three acute hospital Trusts in England to assess the potential for the intervention to be used in clinical practice. Pilot implementation was undertaken during a three-month period by seven clinical co-researchers - nurses and occupational therapists in hospital specialist palliative care services. Implementation was evaluated through data comprised of reflective records of intervention delivery (n = 22), in-depth records of telephone implementation support meetings between research team members and co-researchers (n = 3), and in-depth evaluation meetings (n = 2). Data were qualitatively analysed using an NPT framework designed for intervention evaluation.

RESULTS

Clinical co-researchers readily incorporated the Family-Focused Support Conversation into their everyday work. The intervention changed family support from being solely patient-focused, providing information about patient needs, to family-focused, identifying family concerns about the significance and implications of discharge and facilitating family-focused care. Co-researchers reported an increase in family members' involvement in discharge decisions and end-of-life care planning.

CONCLUSION

The Family-Focused Support Conversation is a novel, evidenced-based and context specific intervention. Pilot implementation demonstrated the potential for the intervention to be used in acute hospitals to support family members during end-of-life care transitions. This subsequently informed a larger scale implementation study.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

n/a.

How short is too short? A randomised controlled trial evaluating short-term existential behavioural therapy for informal caregivers of palliative patients

BACKGROUND

Informal caregivers of palliative patients show higher levels of depression and distress compared with the general population. Fegg's (2013) existential behavioural therapy was shortened to two individual 1-h sessions (short-term existential behavioural therapy).

AIM

Testing the effectiveness of sEBT on psychological symptoms of informal caregivers in comparison with active control.

DESIGN

Randomised controlled trial.

SETTING/PARTICIPANTS

Informal caregivers of palliative in-patients.

METHODS

The primary outcome was depression; secondary outcomes were anxiety, subjective distress and minor mental disorders, positive and negative affect, satisfaction with life, quality of life and direct health care costs. General linear mixed models allow several measurements per participant and change over time. Reasons for declining the intervention were investigated by Rosenstock's Health Belief Model.

RESULTS

Overall inclusion rate was 41.0%. Data of 157 caregivers were available (63.1% females; mean age: 54.6 years, standard deviation (SD): 14.1); 127 participants were included in the main analysis. Participation in sEBT or active control was not significantly associated with post-treatment depression. Outcomes showed prevailingly significant association with time of investigation. Self-efficacy, scepticism of benefit of the intervention, belief of better coping alone and support by family and friends were significant factors in declining participation in the randomised controlled trial.

CONCLUSION

Inclusion rate was tripled compared with a previously evaluated longer EBT group intervention. By shortening the intervention, inclusion rate was traded for effectiveness and the intervention could not impact caregivers' psychological state. Early integration of sEBT and combination of individual and group setting and further study of the optimal length for caregiver interventions are suggested.

Support interventions for families of people with terminal cancer in palliative care

OBJECTIVE

The terminal phase of cancer represents a major crisis for the family system. Regardless of the caregiving role they undertake, family members are forced to address multiple impacts when facing the approaching death of their terminally ill loved one. International guidelines recognize the importance of integrating the family into a care plan. However, more needs to be known about how to deliver optimal family support. The purpose of this study is to review the current state of the art in family/caregiver-focused interventions of people with terminal cancer in palliative care.

METHOD

For this purpose, an overview of the literature's systematic reviews on the topic was conducted to select Randomized Controlled Trials (RCTs) on family/caregiver-focused interventions.

RESULTS

Nine interventions were found in the systematic reviews of literature and meta-analysis. These family/caregiver-focused interventions were then thoroughly and critically analyzed. Despite the heterogeneity with regard to their characteristics, the interventions commonly focused on caregiving matters, were brief in duration, and delivered by non-mental health experts. The efficacy of such interventions was seen as modest.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

Family/caregiver-focused interventions in palliative care remain a matter of concern and more research is needed to identify adequate and effective ways of helping families that face the crisis of terminal illness in the system.

Palliative Care for Family Caregivers

Family caregivers provide substantial care for patients with advanced cancer, while suffering from hidden morbidity and unmet needs. The objectives of this review were to examine risk factors associated with caregiving for patients with advanced cancer, evaluate the evidence for pertinent interventions, and provide a practical framework for palliative care of caregivers in oncology settings. We reviewed studies examining the association of factors at the level of the caregiver, patient, caregiver-patient relationship, and caregiving itself, with adverse outcomes. In addition, we reviewed randomized controlled trials of interventions targeting the caregiver, the caregiver-patient dyad, or the patient and their family. Risk factors for adverse mental health outcomes included those related to the patient's declining status, symptom distress, and poor prognostic understanding; risk factors for adverse bereavement outcomes included unfavorable circumstances of the patient's death. Among the 16 randomized trials, the most promising results showed improvement of depression resulting from early palliative care interventions; results for quality of life were generally nonsignificant or showed an effect only on some subscales. Caregiving outcomes included burden, appraisal, and competence, among others, and showed mixed findings. Only three trials measured bereavement outcomes, with mostly nonsignificant results. On the basis of existent literature and our clinical experience, we propose the CARES framework to guide care for caregivers in oncology settings: Considering caregivers as part of the unit of care, Assessing the caregiver's situation and needs, Referring to appropriate services and resources, Educating about practical aspects of caregiving, and Supporting caregivers through bereavement. Additional trials are needed that are powered specifically for caregiver outcomes, use measures validated for advanced cancer caregivers, and test real-world interventions.

Psychotherapeutisches Arbeiten in Palliative Care

In Palliative Care arbeiten multiprofessionell zusammengesetzte Teams für die Verbesserung oder Erhaltung der Le­bensqualität von schwerstkranken Patienten und ihren Fa­milien. Klinischen Psychologen und approbierten Psychotherapeuten kommt in diesem Feld ein vielfältiges Spektrum von Aufgaben zu, das von der präventiven und supportiven Arbeit bis hin zum psychotherapeutischen Wirken im enge­ren Sinne reicht. Auch wenn die Palliativversorgung bislang vielerorts noch keine bedarfsgerechte Begleitung durch Psychologen und Psychotherapeuten leistet, sind entspre­chende Entwicklungen deutlich festzustellen. Ziel des vorliegenden Beitrags ist es, einen Überblick über Palliative Care als Anwendungsfeld psychologischer und psychotherapeutischer Interventionen zu geben. Nach einer Skizzierung der relevanten Grundzüge von Palliative Care erfolgt eine Darstellung psychologischer und psychotherapeutischer Themen, subdiagnostischer Befunde sowie psychischer Störungen in der Palliativversorgung. Schließlich soll eine Übersicht psychologischer und psychotherapeutischer Interventionen in Palliative Care gegeben werden.

Psychosocial interventions for informal caregivers of people living with cancer

BACKGROUND

Increasingly, cancer is recognised as a chronic condition with a growing population of informal caregivers providing care for cancer patients. Informal caregiving can negatively affect the health and well-being of caregivers. We need a synthesised account of best evidence to aid decision-making about effective ways to support caregivers for individuals 'living with cancer'.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions designed to improve the quality of life (QoL), physical health and well-being of informal caregivers of people living with cancer compared with usual care.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, ProQuest, Open SIGLE, Web of Science from inception up to January 2018, trial registries and citation lists of included studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised and quasi-randomised controlled trials comparing psychosocial interventions delivered to adult informal caregivers of adults affected by cancer on a group or individual basis with usual care. Psychosocial interventions included non-pharmacological interventions that involved an interpersonal relationship between caregivers and healthcare professionals. We included interventions delivered also to caregiver-patient dyads. Interventions delivered to caregivers of individuals receiving palliative or inpatient care were excluded. Our primary outcome was caregiver QoL. Secondary outcomes included patient QoL, caregiver and patient depression, anxiety, psychological distress, physical health status and intervention satisfaction and adverse effects.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Pairs of review authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data and conducted 'Risk of bias' assessments. We synthesised findings using meta-analysis, where possible, and reported remaining results in a narrative synthesis.

MAIN RESULTS

Nineteen trials (n = 3, 725) were included in the review. All trials were reported in English and were undertaken in high-income countries. Trials targeted caregivers of patients affected by a number of cancers spanning newly diagnosed patients, patients awaiting treatment, patients who were being treated currently and individuals post-treatment. Most trials delivered interventions to caregiver-patient dyads (predominantly spousal dyads) and there was variation in intervention delivery to groups or individual participants. There was much heterogeneity across interventions though the majority were defined as psycho-educational. All trials were rated as being at 'high risk of bias'.Compared to usual care, psychosocial interventions may improve slightly caregiver QoL immediately post intervention (standardised mean difference (SMD) 0.29, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.04 to 0.53; studies = 2, 265 participants) and may have little to no effect on caregiver QoL at 12 months (SMD 0.14, 95% CI - 0.11 to 0.40; studies = 2, 239 participants) post-intervention (both low-quality evidence).Psychosocial interventions probably have little to no effect on caregiver depression immediately to one-month post-intervention (SMD 0.01, 95% CI -0.14 to 0.15; studies = 9, 702 participants) (moderate-quality evidence). Psychosocial interventions may have little to no effect on caregiver anxiety immediately post-intervention (SMD -0.12, 95 % CI -0.33 to 0.10; studies = 5, 329 participants), depression three-to-six months (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.38; studies = 5. 379 participants) post-intervention and patient QoL six to 12 months (SMD -0.05, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.26; studies = 3, 294 participants) post-intervention (all low-quality evidence). There was uncertainty whether psychosocial interventions improve patient QoL immediately (SMD -0.03, 95 %CI -0.50 to 0.44; studies = 2, 292 participants) or caregiver anxiety three-to-six months (SMD-0.25, 95% CI -0.64 to 0.13; studies = 4, 272 participants) post-intervention (both very low-quality evidence). Two studies which could not be pooled in a meta-analysis for caregiver physical health status found little to no effect immediately post-intervention and a small intervention effect 12 months post-intervention. Caregiver or patient satisfaction or cost-effectiveness of interventions were not assessed in any studies. Interventions demonstrated good feasibility and acceptability.Psychosocial interventions probably have little to no effect on patient physical health status immediately post-intervention (SMD 0.17, 95 % CI -0.07 to 0.41; studies = 4, 461 participants) and patient depression three to six months post-intervention (SMD-0.11, 95% CI -0.33 to 0.12; studies = 6, 534 participants) (both moderate-quality evidence).Psychosocial interventions may have little to no effect on caregiver psychological distress immediately to one-month (SMD -0.08, 95% CI -0.42 to 0.26; studies = 3, 134 participants), and seven to 12 months (SMD 0.08, 95% CI -0.42 to 0.58; studies = 2, 62 participants) post-intervention; patient depression immediately (SMD -0.12, 95% CI -0.31 to 0.07; studies = 9, 852 participants); anxiety immediately (SMD -0.13, 95% CI -0.41 to 0.15;studies = 4, 422 participants), and three to six months (SMD -0.22, 95% CI -0.45 to 0.02; studies = 4, 370 participants); psychological distress immediately (SMD -0.02, 95% CI -0.47 to 0.44; studies = 2, 74 participants) and seven to 12 months (SMD -0.27, 95% CI -0.78 to 0.24; studies = 2, 61 participants); and physical health status six to 12 months (SMD 0.06, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.30; studies = 2, 275 participants) post-intervention (all low-quality evidence).Three trials reported adverse effects associated with the interventions, compared with usual care, including higher distress, sexual function-related distress and lower relationship satisfaction levels for caregivers, higher distress levels for patients, and that some content was perceived as insensitive to some participants.Trials not able to be pooled in a meta-analysis did not tend to report effect size and it was difficult to discern intervention effectiveness. Variable intervention effects were reported for patient and caregiver outcomes.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Heterogeneity across studies makes it difficult to draw firm conclusions regarding the effectiveness of psychosocial interventions for this population. There is an immediate need for rigorous trials with process evaluations and clearer, detailed intervention descriptions. Cost-effectiveness studies should be conducted alongside future trials.

A multi-component, family-focused and literacy-sensitive intervention to improve medication adherence in patients with heart failure-A randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Medication nonadherence is prevalent and links to serious outcomes (e.g., rehospitalization/death) in heart failure (HF) patients; therefore, an urgent need exists for an intervention to improve and sustain adherence after intervention completion.

OBJECTIVES

To test the efficacy of a multi-component, family-focused, literacy-sensitive (FamLit) intervention on medication adherence in HF patients.

METHODS

Forty-three HF patients and their care partners were enrolled and randomized to receive FamLit or attention-only intervention, including an in-person session at baseline and bi-weekly phone boosters for 3 months. We measured medication adherence from baseline to 3-month post-intervention using the Medication Event Monitoring System.

RESULTS

After 3-month intervention, intervention patients had significantly better medication adherence than control patients. At 6 months (3-months post-intervention), intervention effect on adherence was sustained in the FamLit intervention group, while adherence decreased in the control group.

CONCLUSION

Incorporating care partner support and providing an easy-to-understand intervention to patients-care partners may improve/sustain adherence.

Nursing interventions to support family caregivers in end-of-life care at home: A systematic narrative review

BACKGROUND

Family caregivers are crucial in end-of-life care. However, family caregiving may involve a significant burden with various negative health consequences. Although nurses are in a unique position to support family caregivers at home, little is known about which nursing interventions are effective in this context. Therefore, this study aims to provide insight into nursing interventions currently available to support family caregivers in end-of-life care at home and to describe their effects.

METHODS

A systematic search was conducted in Embase, Medline Ovid, Web of Science, Cochrane Central, CINAHL and Google Scholar. This review included quantitative studies published from January 2003 until December 2018 reporting on nursing interventions to support adult family caregivers in end-of-life care at home. Data were extracted on intervention modalities, intervention components, and family caregivers' outcomes. Methodological quality of the studies was assessed with the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool.

RESULTS

Out of 1531 titles, nine publications were included that reported on eight studies/eight interventions. Of the eight studies, three were randomised controlled trials, one a pilot randomised trial, one a non-randomised trial, and three were single-group prospective studies. Four intervention components were identified: psychoeducation, needs assessment, practical support with caregiving, and peer support. Psychoeducation was the most commonly occurring component. Nursing interventions had a positive effect on the preparedness, competence, rewards, and burden of family caregivers. Multicomponent interventions were the most effective with, potentially, the components 'needs assessment' and 'psychoeducation' being the most effective.

CONCLUSIONS

Although only eight studies are available on nursing interventions to support family caregivers in end-of-life care at home, they show that interventions can have a positive effect on family caregivers' outcomes. Multicomponent interventions proved to be the most successful, implying that nurses should combine different components when supporting family caregivers.

Spiritual Care at the End of Life: Does Educational Intervention Focused on a Broad Definition of Spirituality Increase Utilization of Chaplain Spiritual Support in Hospice?

Background: Research shows that religion and spirituality are important when persons cope with serious and life-threatening illness. Patients who receive good spiritual care report greater quality of life and better coping, and such support is strongly associated with greater well-being, hope, optimism, and reduction of despair at end of life. Despite these benefits, evidence shows that many patients and caregivers (P/C) refuse spiritual care when a hospice team offers it, possibly resulting in unnecessary suffering. Objective: To better understand what contributes to spiritual support acceptance in hospice care. Design: Quasi-experimental quantitative study. Setting/Subjects: 200 patients admitted to hospice. Measurements: Participants were divided equally into intervention and control arms. Control participants received standard information about the availability of chaplain support and an offer for referral to chaplain services. Intervention participants received educational intervention that explained hospice chaplain services and the evidence-based benefits of spiritual support. The association of chaplain acceptance was measured with treatment group, patient age, disease, church affiliation and support, sex, bereavement risk, and place of residence. Results: Among intervention participants, 64 (64%) accepted spiritual support versus 52 (52%) of control participants. The intervention arm's acceptance rate was higher than the control arm after adjustment for other variables. The variables associated with acceptance were age, primary diagnosis, and place of residence. Conclusions: This research suggests that educational intervention that explains spiritual care in hospice and its benefits contributes importantly to greater acceptance and allows P/C to gain the benefits of spiritual support during end-of-life care.

Predicting Family Caregiver Psychosocial Functioning in Palliative Care

Background

Health professionals are expected to support family caregivers of patients requiring palliative care. However, there is a dearth of empirical evidence to help clinicians identify caregivers who might be at risk of poor psychosocial functioning.

Purpose

This secondary analysis of baseline data from a larger study sought to determine if it was possible to predict the psychosocial functioning of family caregivers who were supporting a relative with advanced incurable cancer.

Method

Data from 35 primary family caregivers obtained at the start of home-based palliative care services and five weeks later was used in the analysis. Instruments to measure caregiver preparedness, competence, mastery, social support, anxiety, and self-efficacy were used.

Results

Cluster and logistic analyses revealed that self-reported “anxiety” and “competence” subscale total scores at time of commencement of home-based palliative care services were associated with caregivers at risk of lower levels of psychosocial functioning five weeks later.

Conclusions

This study suggests that it may be possible to identify family caregivers who are at risk for poorer psychosocial functioning. However, replication in a larger sample is required before this screening approach can be recommended for clinical use.

A systematic review of cancer caregiver interventions: Appraising the potential for implementation of evidence into practice

OBJECTIVE

nformal caregivers provide substantial support for people living with cancer. Previous systematic reviews report on the efficacy of cancer caregiver interventions but not their potential to be implemented. The aim of this systematic review was to explore the potential for cancer caregiver interventions to be implemented into practice.

METHODS

We searched three electronic databases to identify cancer caregiver interventions on 5 January 2018. We operationalised six implementation outcomes (acceptability, adoption, appropriateness, feasibility, fidelity, and costs) into a tool to guide data extraction.

RESULTS

The search yielded 33 papers (27 papers from electronic databases and six papers from other sources) reporting on 26 studies that met review criteria. Fewer than half the studies (46%) contained evidence about the acceptability of interventions from caregivers' perspectives; only two studies (8%) included interventions developed with input from caregivers. Two studies (8%) addressed potential adoption of interventions, and no studies discussed intentions, agreement, or action to implement interventions into practice. All studies reported on intervention appropriateness by providing a rationale for the interventions. For feasibility, on average less than one-third of caregivers who were eligible to be involved consented to participate. On fidelity, whether interventions were conducted as intended was reported in 62% of studies. Cost data were reported in terms of intervention delivery, requiring a median time commitment of staff of 180 minutes to be delivered.

CONCLUSIONS

Caregiver intervention studies lack components of study design and reporting that could bridge the gap between research and practice. There is enormous potential for improvements in cancer caregiver intervention study design to plan for future implementation.

The Long-Term effect of A Population-Based Educational Intervention Focusing on End-Of-Life Home Care, Life-Prolongation Treatment, and Knowledge about Palliative Care

Misconceptions and a lack of knowledge are barriers to providing palliative care. This study examined the long-term effect of an educational intervention with the general public focusing on end-of-life home care, life-prolongation treatment, and knowledge about palliative care. We offered a one-hour educational lecture for community residents in 11 districts in Fukushima, Japan. Lecture attendees were asked to complete pre- and post-questionnaires and a six-month postal follow-up questionnaire. A total of 424 respondents completed and returned the follow-up questionnaire. Beliefs about the feasibility of home death did not significantly change. In addition, many of the other significant changes that occurred immediately after the intervention reverted to initial opinions six months later. This population-based educational intervention was not effective for the long term, except that it had a partial influence on certain misconceptions about palliative care. Therefore, other approaches are needed to achieve substantial long-term effects.

I-CoPE: A pilot study of structured supportive care delivery to people with newly diagnosed high-grade glioma and their carers

Background

There is limited evidence to guide best approaches to supportive care delivery to patients with high-grade glioma. I-CoPE (Information, Coordination, Preparation and Emotional) is a structured supportive care approach for people with newly diagnosed high-grade glioma and their family carers. Delivered by a cancer care coordinator, I-CoPE consists of (1) staged information, (2) regular screening for needs, (3) communication and coordination, and (4) family carer engagement. This pilot study tested acceptability and preliminary effectiveness of I-CoPE, delivered over 3 transitions in the illness course, for people newly diagnosed with high-grade glioma and their carers.

Methods

I-CoPE was delivered at the identified transition times (at diagnosis, following the diagnostic hospitalization, following radiotherapy), with associated data collection (enrollment, 2 weeks, 12 weeks). Outcomes of interest included: acceptability/feasibility (primary); quality of life; needs for support; disease-related information needs; and carer preparedness to care (secondary). Descriptive statistics were used to assess acceptability outcomes, while patient and carer outcomes were assessed using repeated measures ANOVA.

Results

Thirty-two patients (53% male, mean age 60) and 31 carers (42% male) participated. I-CoPE was highly acceptable: 86% of eligible patients enrolled, and of these 88% completed the study. Following I-CoPE patients and carers reported fewer information needs (P < .001), while carers reported fewer unmet supportive care needs (P < .01) and increased preparedness to care (P = .04). Quality of life did not significantly change.

Conclusion

A model of supportive care delivered based upon illness transitions is feasible, acceptable, and suggests preliminary efficacy in some areas. Formal randomized studies are now required.

Distance education methods are useful for delivering education to palliative caregivers: A single-arm trial of an education package (PalliativE Caregivers Education Package)

BACKGROUND

Face-to-face/group education for palliative caregivers is successful, but relies on caregivers travelling, being absent from the patient, and rigid timings. This presents inequities for those in rural locations.

AIM

To design and test an innovative distance-learning educational package (PrECEPt: PalliativE Caregivers Education Package).

DESIGN

Single-arm mixed-method feasibility proof-of-concept trial (ACTRN12616000601437). The primary outcome was carer self-efficacy, with secondary outcomes focused on caregiver preparedness and carer tasks/needs. Analysis focused on three outcome measures (taken at baseline and 6 weeks) and feasibility/acceptability qualitative data.

SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS

A single specialist palliative care service. Eligible informal caregivers were those of patients registered with the outpatient or community service, where the patient had a prognosis of ⩾12 weeks, supporting someone with nutrition/hydration and/or pain management needs, proficient in English and no major mental health diagnosis.

RESULTS

Two modules were developed and tested (nutrition/hydration and pain management) with 18 caregivers. The materials did not have a statistically significant impact on carer self-efficacy. However, statistically significant improvements were observed on the two subsidiary measures of (1) caregiving tasks, consequences and needs ( p = 0.03, confidence interval: 0.72, 9.4) and (2) caregiver preparedness ( p = 0.001, confidence interval: -1.22, -0.46). The study determined that distance learning is acceptable and feasible for both caregivers and healthcare professionals.

CONCLUSION

Distance education improves caregiver preparedness and is a feasible and acceptable approach. A two-arm trial would determine whether the materials benefitted caregivers and patients compared to a control group not receiving the materials. Additional modules could be fruitfully developed and offered.

Intent to use a web-based psychological intervention for partners of cancer patients: Associated factors and preferences

This study examined partners of cancer patients intention to use a web-based psychological intervention, their preferences regarding its preconditions, functionalities and topics, and factors related to their intention. One hundred and sixty-eight partners completed a questionnaire about these aspects. Forty-eight percent of the partners would (maybe) make use of a web-based intervention. Partners who intended to participate were significantly younger, used the Internet more often, and perceived more caregiver strain. Most partners preferred an intervention that takes less than 1 hour/week, lasts five weeks or more, and contains information and peer support. Half of the partners would like to receive online guidance.

Supporting carers to manage pain medication in cancer patients at the end of life: A feasibility trial

BACKGROUND

Carers of people with advanced cancer play a significant role in managing pain medication, yet they report insufficient information and support to do so confidently and competently. There is limited research evidence on the best ways for clinicians to help carers with medication management.

AIMS

To develop a pain medicines management intervention (Cancer Carers Medicines Management) for cancer patients' carers near the end of life and evaluate feasibility and acceptability to nurses and carers. To test the feasibility of trial research procedures and to inform decisions concerning a full-scale randomised controlled trial.

DESIGN

Phase I-II clinical trial. A systematic, evidence-informed participatory method was used to develop CCMM: a nurse-delivered structured conversational process. A two-arm, cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial of Cancer Carers Medicines Management was conducted, with an embedded qualitative study to evaluate participants' experiences of Cancer Carers Medicines Management and trial procedures.

SETTING

Community settings in two study sites.

PARTICIPANTS

Phase I comprises 57 carers, patients and healthcare professionals and Phase II comprises 12 nurses and 15 carers.

RESULTS

A novel intervention was developed. Nurses were recruited and randomised. Carer recruitment to the trial was problematic with fewer than predicted eligible participants, and nurses judged a high proportion unsuitable to recruit into the study. Attrition rates following recruitment were typical for the study population. Cancer Carers Medicines Management was acceptable to carers and nurses who took part, and some benefits were identified.

CONCLUSION

Cancer Carers Medicines Management is a robustly developed medicines management intervention which merits further research to test its effectiveness to improve carers' management of pain medicines with patients at the end of life. The study highlighted aspects of trial design that need to be considered in future research.

Looking beyond the forest: Using harvest plots, gap analysis, and expert consultations to assess effectiveness, engage stakeholders, and inform policy

We describe a combination of methods for assessing the effectiveness of complex interventions, especially where substantial heterogeneity with regard to the population, intervention, comparison, outcomes, and study design of interest is expected. We applied these methods in a recent systematic review of the effectiveness of reinforced home-based palliative care (rHBPC) interventions, which included home-based care with an additional and explicit component of lay caregiver support. We first summarized the identified evidence, deemed inappropriate for statistical pooling, graphically by creating harvest plots. Although very useful as a tool for summary and presentation of overall effectiveness, such graphical summary approaches may obscure relevant differences between studies. Thus, we then used a gap analysis and conducted expert consultations to look beyond the aggregate level at how the identified evidence of effectiveness may be explained. The goal of these supplemental methods was to step outside of the conventional systematic review and explore this heterogeneity from a broader perspective, based on the experience of palliative care researchers and practitioners. The gap analysis and expert consultations provided valuable input into possible underlying explanations in the evidence, which could be helpful in the further adaptation and testing of existing rHBPC interventions or the development and evaluation of new ones. We feel that such a combination of methods could prove accessible, understandable, and useful in informing decisions and could thus help increase the relevance of systematic reviews to the decision-making process.

The effectiveness and cost‐effectiveness of inpatient specialist palliative care in acute hospitals for adults with advanced illness and their caregivers

This is a protocol for a Cochrane Review (Intervention). The objectives are as follows:

Feasibility randomised controlled trial of a self-help acceptance and commitment therapy intervention for grief and psychological distress in carers of palliative care patients

We tested the feasibility and preliminary effectiveness of an acceptance and commitment therapy self-help intervention for grief and psychological distress in carers of patients in palliative care. Carers were randomised to the control group, which received treatment as usual, or the intervention group, which received treatment as usual plus an acceptance and commitment therapy–based self-help booklet and telephone support call. Questionnaires were completed at baseline, 1-month post-allocation and 6 months post-loss. Results indicated that the intervention was generally feasible and viewed as acceptable to carers. Preliminary effectiveness analyses showed at least a small effect in acceptance, valued-living, grief and psychological distress.

Dyadic psychological intervention for patients with cancer and caregivers in home-based specialized palliative care: The Domus model

Objective:

Patients with incurable cancer and their informal caregivers have numerous psychological and psychosocial needs. Many of these patients wish to receive their care and die at home. Few home-based specialized palliative care (SPC) interventions systematically integrate psychological support. We present a psychological intervention for patient–caregiver dyads developed for an ongoing randomized controlled trial (RCT) of home-based SPC, known as Domus, as well as the results of an assessment of its acceptability and feasibility.

Method:

The Domus model of SPC for patients with incurable cancer and their caregivers offered systematic psychological assessment and dyadic intervention as part of interdisciplinary care. Through accelerated transition to SPC, the aim of the model was to enhance patients' chances of receiving care and dying at home. Integration of psychological support sought to facilitate this goal by alleviating distress in patients and caregivers. Psychologists provided needs-based sessions based on existential-phenomenological therapy. Feasibility and acceptability were investigated by examining enrollment, nonparticipation, and completion of psychological sessions.

Results:

Enrollment in the RCT and uptake of the psychological intervention indicated that it was feasible and acceptable to patients and caregivers. The strengths of the intervention included its focus on dyads, psychological distress, and existential concerns, as well as interdisciplinary collaboration and psychological interventions offered according to need. Its main limitation was a lack of an intervention for other family members.

Significance of Results:

Our results show that psychological intervention can be systematically integrated into SPC and that it appears feasible to provide dyadic needs-based sessions with an existential therapeutic approach. The Domus RCT will provide evidence of the efficacy of a novel model of multidisciplinary SPC.

Effect of a Whole-Person Model of Care on Patient Experience in Patients With Complex Chronic Illness in Late Life

Background:

Patients with serious chronic illness are at a greater risk of depersonalized, overmedicalized care as they move into later life. Existing intervention research on person-focused care for persons in this transitional period is limited.

Objective:

To test the effects of LifeCourse, a team-based, whole-person intervention emphasizing listening to and knowing patients, on patient experience at 6 months.

Design:

This is a quasi-experimental study with patients allocated to LifeCourse and comparison groups based on 2 geographic locations. Robust change-score regression models adjusted for baseline differences and confounding.

Setting/Participants:

Patients (113 intervention, 99 comparison in analyses) were individuals with heart failure or other serious chronic illness, cancer, or dementia who had visits to hospitals at a large multipractice health system in the United States Midwest.

Measurements:

Primary outcome was 6-month change in patient experience measured via a novel, validated 21-item patient experience tool developed specifically for this intervention. Covariates included demographics, comorbidity score, and primary diagnosis.

Results:

At 6 months, LifeCourse was associated with a moderate improvement in overall patient experience versus usual care. Individual domain subscales for care team, communication, and patient goals were not individually significant but trended positively in the direction of effect.

Conclusion:

Person-focused, team-based interventions can improve patient experience with care at a stage fraught with overmedicalization and many care needs. Improvement in patient experience in LifeCourse represents the sum effect of small improvements across different domains/aspects of care such as relationships with and work by the care team.

Supporting the provision of palliative care in the home environment: a proof-of-concept single-arm trial of a PalliativE Carers Education Package (PrECEPt)

INTRODUCTION

Practical educational interventions for palliative carers are needed. Current supports frequently rely on carers travelling to a central venue to receive education. A substantial gap therefore exists around determining how high-quality relevant information can be delivered nationally, with limited cost implications, using educational methods that are acceptable to carers in palliative care. This study seeks to design and assess feasibility and acceptability of a distance-learning approach to educating carers.

METHODS

This is an embedded mixed-method feasibility and acceptability study. It embeds an unblinded 1-arm pilot test, with subsequent qualitative interviews which will be used to inform the assessment of the intervention's acceptability and feasibility. The theoretical framework is self-efficacy theory, whereby we seek to impact carers' beliefs in their ability to carry out and succeed in caring tasks and situations. The educational materials focused on pain and nutrition/hydration will be developed in phase 1 with former carers (n=8) providing input into the content and style of materials. The educational package privileges adult-learning styles, recognising and responding to the learner's context including their learning needs, prior knowledge and motivations for engaging in education. The materials will be tested with up to 24 current carers.

ANALYSIS

Analysis will focus on determining recruitment processes for a full-scale study, data collection procedures/completion rates, queries directed to the hospice from carers involved in the feasibility work, mode of delivery and content of the materials. The primary outcome measure is self-efficacy, with other measures focused on caregiver preparedness and caregiving tasks, consequences and needs questionnaire. Adherence to educational components will also be collected and reported.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval has been provided by the participating site, Calvary Healthcare, Canberra, reference 02-2016, and the Australian Catholic University. Results will be published in peer-reviewed journals, presented at conferences and a lay summary sent to participants.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ACTRN12616000601437; Pre-results.

Populations and Interventions for Palliative and End-of-Life Care: A Systematic Review

IMPORTANCE

Evidence supports palliative care effectiveness. Given workforce constraints and the costs of new services, payers and providers need help to prioritize their investments. They need to know which patients to target, which personnel to hire, and which services best improve outcomes.

OBJECTIVE

To inform how payers and providers should identify patients with "advanced illness" and the specific interventions they should implement, we reviewed the evidence to identify (1) individuals appropriate for palliative care and (2) elements of health service interventions (personnel involved, use of multidisciplinary teams, and settings of care) effective in achieving better outcomes for patients, caregivers, and the healthcare system.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

Systematic searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, Web of Science, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases (1/1/2001-1/8/2015).

RESULTS

Randomized controlled trials (124) met inclusion criteria. The majority of studies in cancer (49%, 38 of 77 studies) demonstrated statistically significant patient or caregiver outcomes (e.g., p < 0.05), as did those in congestive heart failure (CHF) (62%, 13 of 21), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD; 58%, 11 of 19), and dementia (60%, 15 of 25). Most prognostic criteria used clinicians' judgment (73%, 22 of 30). Most interventions included a nurse (70%, 69 of 98), and many were nurse-only (39%, 27 of 69). Social workers were well represented, and home-based approaches were common (56%, 70 of 124). Home interventions with visits were more effective than those without (64%, 28 of 44; vs. 46%, 12 of 26). Interventions improved communication and care planning (70%, 12 of 18), psychosocial health (36%, 12 of 33, for depressive symptoms; 41%, 9 of 22, for anxiety), and patient (40%, 8 of 20) and caregiver experiences (63%, 5 of 8). Many interventions reduced hospital use (65%, 11 of 17), but most other economic outcomes, including costs, were poorly characterized. Palliative care teams did not reliably lower healthcare costs (20%, 2 of 10).

CONCLUSIONS

Palliative care improves cancer, CHF, COPD, and dementia outcomes. Effective models include nurses, social workers, and home-based components, and a focus on communication, psychosocial support, and the patient or caregiver experience. High-quality research on intervention costs and cost outcomes in palliative care is limited.

Behavioral and Educational Interventions to Support Family Caregivers in End-of-Life Care

The demand for family caregivers steadily increases as the number of people receiving hospice and palliative care rises. Family caregivers play a significant role in supporting their loved ones in end-of-life care. However, there is limited evidence about the effectiveness of the interventions for supporting family caregivers. This article synthesizes behavioral and educational interventions that support family caregivers in end-of-life care. A systematic review was conducted and searched interventional studies published between 2004 and 2014 in PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and The Cochrane Library electronic databases. Fourteen studies were identified and analyzed: 4 educational studies, 6 cognitive behavioral therapy studies, and 4 psychoeducational studies. All educational and behavioral interventions had developed structures and treatment manuals and improved family caregivers’ outcomes. The cognitive behavioral therapy resulted in more positive outcomes than the other 2 interventions. More rigorous randomized controlled trials are needed to replicate current effective interventions with larger and diverse sample. Future studies need to develop tools for assessing family caregivers’ needs, create consistent and specific tools to effectively measure family caregivers’ outcomes, incorporate a cost-effectiveness analysis, and find the most efficient intervention format and method.

What Are the Key Elements of Educational Interventions for Lay Carers of Patients With Advanced Disease? A Systematic Literature Search and Narrative Review of Structural Components, Processes and Modes of Delivery

CONTEXT

Educating carers about symptom management may help meet patient and carer needs in relation to distressing symptoms in advanced disease. Reviews of the effectiveness of carer interventions exist, but few have focused on educational interventions and none on the key elements that comprise them but which could inform evidence-based design.

OBJECTIVES

To identify the key elements (structural components, processes, and delivery modes) of educational interventions for carers of patients with advanced disease.

METHODS

We systematically searched seven databases, applied inclusion and exclusion criteria, conducted quality appraisal, extracted data, and performed a narrative analysis.

RESULTS

We included 62 articles related to 49 interventions. Two main delivery modes were identified: personnel-delivered interventions and stand-alone resources. Personnel-delivered interventions targeted individuals or groups, the former conducted at single or multiple time points, and the latter delivered as series. Just more than half targeted carers rather than patient-carer dyads. Most were developed for cancer; few focused purely on symptom management. Stand-alone resources were rare. Methods to evaluate interventions ranged from postintervention evaluations to fully powered randomized controlled trials but of variable quality.

CONCLUSION

Published evaluations of educational interventions for carers in advanced disease are limited, particularly for non-cancer conditions. Key elements for consideration in developing such interventions were identified; however, lack of reporting of reasons for nonparticipation or dropout from interventions limits understanding of the contribution of these elements to interventions' effectiveness. When developing personnel-delivered interventions for carers in advanced disease, consideration of the disease (and, therefore, caring) trajectory, intervention accessibility (timing, location, and transport), and respite provision may be helpful.

Evaluation of a video, telephone follow-ups, and an online forum as components of a psychoeducational intervention for caregivers of persons with advanced cancer

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to evaluate caregivers' perceptions of a video, telephone follow-up, and online forum as components of a psychoeducational intervention.

METHOD

Qualitative semistructured face-to-face interviews were conducted with 12 participants two weeks post-intervention. The study was conducted from September of 2012 to May of 2015. Family caregivers were recruited from four home hospice organizations (HCA Hospice Care, Metta Hospice, Singapore Cancer Centre, and Agape Methodist Hospice) and the National Cancer Centre outpatient clinic in Singapore. A purposive sample was employed, and participants were recruited until data saturation. Qualitative interviews were transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were coded and analyzed using content analysis. Two of the research team members were involved in the data analysis.

RESULTS

Two-thirds of participants were females (n = 8). Their ages ranged from 22 to 67 (mean = 50.50, SD = 11.53). About two-thirds were married (n = 7). Most participants were caring for a parent (n = 10), one for a spouse, and one for her mother-in-law. Caregivers favored the use of video for delivery of educational information. They liked the visual and audio aspects of the video. The ability to identify with the caregiver and scenarios in the video helped in the learning process. They appreciated telephone follow-ups from healthcare professionals for informational and emotional support. The online forum as a platform for sharing of information and provision of support was not received well by the caregivers in this study. The reasons for this included their being busy, not being computer savvy, rarely surfing the internet, and not feeling comfortable sharing with strangers on an online platform.

SIGNIFICANCE OF RESULTS

This study provided insight into caregivers' perceptions of various components of a psychoeducational intervention. It also gave us a better understanding of how future psychoeducational interventions and support for caregivers of persons with advanced cancer could be provided.