Background: Engaging families in postsurgical care is potentially beneficial for improving cancer patient outcomes and quality of care. The authors developed a family involvement program (FIP) and in this study, the authors aim to evaluate the impact of the FIP on family caregiver burden and well-being. Moreover, the authors aim to assess the fidelity of the program. Materials and methods: This is a preplanned subgroup analysis of a patient-preferred prospective cohort study that included family caregivers of patients who underwent major oncological surgery for gastrointestinal tumors. Only patient-nominated family caregivers could participate in the FIP. Caregivers received structured training in fundamental caregiving tasks from healthcare professionals and then actively participated in these tasks. Caregiver burden and well-being were measured four times (at hospital admission, at hospital discharge, and at 1 and 3 months posthospital discharge) using the Caregiver Strain Index+ (CSI+) and the Care-related Quality of Life instrument (CarerQoL-7D). The fidelity of the FIP was assessed by recording completion of care activities. In addition, family caregivers were asked whether they would participate in the FIP again. Results: Most of the 152 family caregivers were female (77.6%), and their mean age was 61.3 years (SD=11.6). Median CSI+ scores ranged between -1 and 0 and remained below the cutoff point of experiencing burden. CarerQoL-7D results indicated no significant differences in family caregivers' well-being over time. Upon discharge, over 75% of the family caregivers stated that they would recommend the FIP to others. The highest compliance with all fundamental care activities was observed during postoperative days 2-4. Conclusion: The family caregivers of oncological surgical patients who participated in the FIP exhibited acceptable levels of caregiver burden and well-being. These findings suggest that the FIP is a valuable intervention to equip family caregivers with the skills to navigate the uncertain period following a patient's hospital discharge.
MULTIFILE
Background: Online contacts with a health professional have the potential to support family caregivers of people with dementia. Objective: The goal of the research was to study the effects of an online self-management support intervention in helping family caregivers deal with behavior changes of a relative with dementia. The intervention—involving among others personal email contacts with a dementia nurse—was compared with online interventions without these email contacts. Methods: A randomized controlled trial was conducted with 81 family caregivers of people with dementia who live at home. Participants were randomly assigned to a (1) major self-management support intervention consisting of personal email contacts with a specialist dementia nurse, online videos, and e-bulletins; (2) medium intervention consisting only of online videos and e-bulletins; or (3) minor intervention consisting of only the e-bulletins. The primary outcome was family caregivers’ self-efficacy in dealing with behavior changes of the relative with dementia. Secondary outcomes were family caregivers’ reports of behavior problems in the people with dementia and the quality of the relationship between the family caregiver and the person with dementia. Measurements were performed at the baseline and at 6 (T1) and 12 weeks (T2) after the baseline. A mixed-model analysis was conducted to compare the outcomes of the 3 intervention arms. Results: Family caregivers participating in the major intervention involving email contacts showed no statistically significant differences in self-efficacy after the intervention compared with the minor intervention involving only e-bulletins (difference –0.02, P=.99). In the adjusted analysis, the medium intervention (involving videos and e-bulletins) showed a negative trend over http://www.jmir.org/2020/2/e13001/ J Med Internet Res 2020 | vol. 22 | iss. 2 | e13001 | p. 1 (page number not for citation purposes) JOURNAL OF MEDICAL INTERNET RESEARCH Huis in het Veld et al XSL•FO RenderX time (difference –4.21, P=.09) and at T1 (difference –4.71, P=.07) compared with the minor intervention involving only e-bulletins. No statistical differences were found between the intervention arms in terms of the reported behavior problems and the quality of the relationship between the family caregiver and the person with dementia. Conclusions: The expectation that an online self-management support intervention involving email contacts would lead to positive effects and be more effective than online interventions without personal email contacts was not borne out. One explanation might be related to the fact that not all family caregivers who were assigned to that intervention actually made use of the opportunity for personal email contact. The online videos were also not always viewed. To obtain more definite conclusions, future research involving extra efforts to reach higher use rates is required.
LINK
Background: Optimizing transitional care by practicing family-centered care might reduce unplanned events for patients who undergo major abdominal cancer surgery. However, it remains unknown whether involving family caregivers in patients’ healthcare also has negative consequences for patient safety. This study assessed the safety of family involvement in patients’ healthcare by examining the cause of unplanned events in patients who participated in a family involvement program (FIP) after major abdominal cancer surgery. Methods: This is a secondary analysis focusing on the intervention group of a prospective cohort study conducted in the Netherlands. Data were collected from April 2019 to May 2022. Participants in the intervention group were patients who engaged in a FIP. Unplanned events were analyzed, and root causes were identified using the medical version of a prevention- and recovery-information system for monitoring and analysis (PRISMA) that analyses unintended events in healthcare. Unplanned events were compared between patients who received care from family caregivers and patients who received professional at-home care after discharge. A Mann-Whitney U test was used to analyze data. Results: Of the 152 FIP participants, 68 experienced an unplanned event and were included. 112 unplanned events occurred with 145 root causes since some unplanned events had several root causes. Most root causes of unplanned events were patient-related factors (n = 109, 75%), such as patient characteristics and disease-related factors. No root causes due to inadequate healthcare from the family caregiver were identified. Unplanned events did not differ statistically (interquartile range 1–2) (p = 0.35) between patients who received care from trained family caregivers and those who received professional at-home care after discharge. Conclusion: Based on the insights from the root-cause analysis in this prospective multicenter study, it appears that unplanned emergency room visits and hospital readmissions are not related to the active involvement of family caregivers in surgical follow-up care. Moreover, surgical follow-up care by trained family caregivers during hospitalization was not associated with increased rates of unplanned adverse events. Hence, the concept of active family involvement by proficiently trained family caregivers in postoperative care appears safe and feasible for patients undergoing major abdominal surgery.
DOCUMENT
Artikel van Judith Huis in het Veld, docent onderzoeker van de Hogeschool Inholland verschenen in Research in Gerontological Nursing ABSTRACT The current article discusses how and by whom family caregivers want to be supported in selfmanagement when managing changes in behavior and mood of relatives with dementia and whether family caregivers consider eHealth a useful tool for self-management support. Four asynchronous online focus groups were held with 32 family caregivers of individuals with dementia. Transcripts of the online focus groups were analyzed using qualitative thematic analysis. Family caregivers need support from professionals or peers in the form of (a) information about dementia and its symptoms, (b) tips and advice on managing changes in behavior and mood, (c) opportunities to discuss experiences and feelings, and (d) appreciation and acknowledgement of caregiving. The opinions of family caregivers about self-management support through eHealth were also reported. Findings suggest a personal approach is essential to self-management support for family caregivers managing changes in behavior and mood of relatives with dementia. In addition, self-management support can be provided to some extent through eHealth, but this medium cannot replace personal contacts entirely.
DOCUMENT
AIM: To assess the effects of family nursing conversations on family caregiver burden, patients' quality of life, family functioning and the amount of professional home health care.DESIGN: A controlled before-and-after design.METHODS: Intervention group families participated in two family nursing conversations incorporated in home health care; control group families received usual home health care. Patients and family members completed a set of questionnaires on entering the study and 6 months later to assess family caregiver burden, family functioning and patients' quality of life. The amount of home health care was extracted from patient files. Data were collected between January 2018-June 2019.RESULTS: Data of 51 patients (mean age 80; 47% male) and 61 family members (mean age 67; 38% male) were included in the results. Family caregiver burden remained stable in the intervention group whereas it increased in the control group. Family functioning improved significantly compared with the control group for patients and family members in the intervention group. No significant effects on patients' quality of life emerged. The amount of professional home health care decreased significantly in the intervention group whereas it remained equal in the control group.CONCLUSION: Family nursing conversations prevented family caregiver burden, improved family functioning, but did not affect patients' quality of life. In addition, the amount of home health care decreased following the family nursing conversations.IMPACT: Countries with ageing populations seek to reduce professional and residential care and therefore encourage family caregiving. Intensive family caregiving, however, places families at risk for caregiver burden which may lead to increased professional care and admission into residential care. This study demonstrates that family nursing conversations help nurses to prevent family caregiver burden and improve family functioning while decreasing the amount of home health care.
DOCUMENT
AIM: This study aimed to examine the extent, range and variety of research in Europe describing healthcare interventions for older people with dementia (PwD) and family caregivers.METHODS: This was a scoping review and followed the PRISMA Scoping Review guideline. MEDLINE, CINAHL and Cochrane library databases were searched for studies published between 2010 and 2020. Studies reporting healthcare interventions in Europe for PwD over 65 years and their family caregivers were included.RESULTS: Twenty-one studies from six European countries were included. The types of healthcare intervention identified were categorized as follows: (1) family unit intervention (interventions for both PwD and their family caregiver), (2) individual intervention (separate interventions for PwD or family caregivers) and (3) family caregiver only intervention (interventions for family caregivers only but with outcomes for both PwD and family caregivers).CONCLUSIONS: This review provides insight into healthcare interventions for older PwD and family caregivers in Europe. More studies are needed that focus on the family as a unit of care in dementia.
DOCUMENT
Purpose: As recovery time after oncological surgery can be long, family caregivers often play an important role in the delivery of care after patients’ discharge. To prepare carers for this role, we developed a family involvement program (FIP) to enhance their active involvement in post-surgical oncology care during hospitalization. The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore family caregivers experience of participating in a FIP. Methods: We conducted semi-structured interviews with 12 family caregivers who participated in the family involvement program. The program is comprised of two main components (1) training and coaching of physicians and nurses; (2) active involvement of family caregivers in fundamental care activities. This active involvement included six activities. Data were analyzed using interpretative phenomenological analysis. Results: Family caregivers positively valued the program. Active participation in post-surgical care was experienced as an acceptable burden. The program gave participants the ability to simply be present (‘being there’) which was considered as essential and improved their understanding of care, although family caregivers sometimes experienced emotional moments. Active involvement strengthened existent relationship between the family caregiver and the patient. Participants thought clinical supervision. by nurses is important. Conclusions: Physical proximity appeared as an essential part of the family involvement program. It helped carers to feel they made a meaningful contribution to their loved ones’ wellbeing. Asking families to participate in fundamental care activities in post-surgical oncology care was acceptable, and not over-demanding for caregivers.
DOCUMENT
Aim: To describe the extent of perceived collaboration between family caregivers of older persons and hospital nurses.Background: Collaboration between hospital nurses and family caregivers is of increasing importance in older patient’s care. Research lacks a specific focus on family caregiver’s collaboration with nurses.Method: Using a cross-sectional design, 302 caregivers of older patients (≥ 70 years) completed the 20-item Family Collaboration Scale with the subscales: trust in nursing care, accessible nurse, and influence on decisions. Date were analyzed with descriptive statistics and bivariate correlations.Results: Family caregivers rated their level of trust in nurses and nurses’ accessibility higher than the level of their influence on decisions. Family caregivers who had more contact with nurses perceived higher levels of influence on decisions (p ≤ .001) and overall collaboration (p ≤ .001).Conclusion: Family caregivers’ collaboration with nurses can be improved, especially in recognizing and exploiting family caregivers as partner in the care for older hospitalized persons and regarding their level of influence on decisions.Implications for Nursing Management: Insight into family caregivers’ collaboration with nurses will help nurse managers to jointlydevelop policy with nurses on how to organize more family caregiver’ involvement in the standard care for older persons.
DOCUMENT
Objective To evaluate the effects of a psycho-educational intervention on caregiver burden in partners of patients with postoperative heart failure. Background Since partners of cardiac surgery patients play a significant role in the patient’s recovery, it is important to address their needs during hospitalization and after discharge. Methods Forty-two patients with postoperative heart failure and their partners participated in a randomized controlled pilot study. Dyads in the intervention group received psycho-educational support from a multidisciplinary team. Dyads in the control group received usual care. Results No significant differences were found in the performance of caregiving tasks and perceived caregiver burden in the control versus the intervention group. Conclusion A pilot study exploring the effects of a psycho-educational intervention in patients and their partners did not reveal significant effects with regard to reduced feelings of burden in partners. Alleviating caregiver burden in partners may need a more intense or specific approach.
LINK
AIM: To extract and interpret quantitative data exploring the effectiveness of family health conversations (FHCs) on family functioning, perceived support, health-related quality of life, caregiver burden and family health in families living with critical or chronic health conditions.BACKGROUND: Addressing the health of families affected by critical or chronic illnesses requires focused attention. The effective integration of FHCs is hampered by a scarcity of rigorous quantitative studies that provide solid evidence on best practices and outcomes.DESIGN: A systematic review following the Joanna Briggs Institute guidelines.METHODS: The review is reported according to the PRISMA 2020 checklist. Appropriate studies were searched in PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus and Cochrane Databases. Results of the search were imported into the Covidence web-based program. Included were studies with a quantitative research design, delivered to families with critical or chronic health conditions, describing FHCs based on the Calgary Family Assessment Model and/or the Calgary Family Intervention Model, and/or the Illness Beliefs Model, using reliable and validated instruments, published between 2008 and 2023, and written in English.RESULTS: In total, 24 papers met the inclusion criteria. Sixteen papers used a quasi-experimental design, eight of which included a control group. Two papers used a mixed methods design, and six papers were randomised controlled trials (RCTs). A statistically significant effect of FHCs on family functioning was reported in two RCTs and three quasi-experimental papers. We also found that a statistically significant effect of FHCs was reported on perceived support in 9 of 15 papers, quality of life in 4 of 11 papers and caregiver burden in 1 of 3 papers.CONCLUSION AND IMPLICATIONS FOR CLINICAL PRACTICE: The interventions reviewed revealed variability and partial results concerning the effectiveness of FHCs on family functioning. More rigorous research about short-term, intermediate- and long-term effectiveness is needed before conclusions can be drawn.REPORTING METHOD: The study is reported according to the PRISMA 2020 (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses) (File S1).PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: No patient or public contribution. Data were gathered from previously published studies.
LINK
