Dataset Information

Organising Support for Carers of Stroke Survivors (OSCARSS): a cluster randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation.

ABSTRACT:

Objective

Investigated clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a person-centred intervention for informal carers/caregivers of stroke survivors.

Design

Pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) with economic and process evaluation.

Setting

Clusters were services, from a UK voluntary sector specialist provider, delivering support primarily in the homes of stroke survivors and informal carers.

Participants

Adult carers in participating clusters were referred to the study by cluster staff following initial support contact.

Interventions

Intervention was the Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool for Stroke: a staff-facilitated, carer-led approach to help identify, prioritise and address the specific support needs of carers. It required at least one face-to-face support contact dedicated to carers, with reviews as required. Control was usual care, which included carer support (unstructured and variable).

Outcome measures

Participants provided study entry and self-reported outcome data by postal questionnaires, 3 and 6?months after first contact by cluster staff.

Primary outcome

3-month caregiver strain (Family Appraisal of Caregiving Questionnaire, FACQ).

Secondary outcomes

FACQ subscales of caregiver distress and positive appraisals of caregiving, mood (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale) and satisfaction with stroke services (Pound). The economic evaluation included self-reported healthcare utilisation, intervention costs and EQ-5D-5L.

Randomisation and masking

Clusters were recruited before randomisation to intervention or control, with stratification for size of service. Cluster staff could not be masked as training was required for participation. Carer research participants provided self-reported outcome data unaware of allocation; they consented to follow-up data collection only.

Results

Between 1 February 2017 and 31 July 2018, 35 randomised clusters (18 intervention; 17 control) recruited 414 cRCT carers (208 intervention; 206 control). Study entry characteristics were well balanced.

Primary outcome measure

intention-to-treat analysis for 84% retained participants (175 intervention; 174 control) found mean (SD) FACQ carer strain at 3 months to be 3.11 (0.87) in the control group compared with 3.03 (0.90) in the intervention group, adjusted mean difference of -0.04 (95% CI -0.20 to 0.13). Secondary outcomes had similarly small differences and tight CIs. Sensitivity analyses suggested robust findings. Intervention fidelity was not achieved. Intervention-related group costs were marginally higher with no additional health benefit observed on EQ-5D-5L. No adverse events were related to the intervention.

Conclusions

The intervention was not fully implemented in this pragmatic trial. As delivered, it conferred no clinical benefits and is unlikely to be cost-effective compared with usual care from a stroke specialist provider organisation. It remains unclear how best to support carers of stroke survivors. To overcome the implementation challenges of person-centred care in carers' research and service development, staff training and organisational support would need to be enhanced.

Trial registration number

ISRCTN58414120.

SUBMITTER: Patchwood E

PROVIDER: S-EPMC7805348 | biostudies-literature | 2021 Jan

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Organising Support for Carers of Stroke Survivors (OSCARSS): a cluster randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation.

Patchwood Emma E Woodward-Nutt Kate K Rhodes Sarah A SA Batistatou Evridiki E Camacho Elizabeth E Knowles Sarah S Darley Sarah S Grande Gunn G Ewing Gail G Bowen Audrey A

BMJ open 20210112 1

<h4>Objective</h4>Investigated clinical effectiveness and cost-effectiveness of a person-centred intervention for informal carers/caregivers of stroke survivors.<h4>Design</h4>Pragmatic cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) with economic and process evaluation.<h4>Setting</h4>Clusters were services, from a UK voluntary sector specialist provider, delivering support primarily in the homes of stroke survivors and informal carers.<h4>Participants</h4>Adult carers in participating clusters were ...[more]

PMID: 33436463

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundStroke often results in chronic disability, with partners and family members taking on the role of informal caregiver. There is considerable uncertainty regarding how best to identify and address carers' needs. The Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool (CSNAT) is a carer-led approach to individualised assessment and support for caregiving that may be beneficial in palliative care contexts. CSNAT includes an implementation toolkit. Through collaboration, including with service users, we adapted CSNAT for stroke and for use in a UK stroke specialist organisation providing long-term support. The main aims of OSCARSS are to investigate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of CSNAT-Stroke relative to current practice. This paper focuses on the trial protocol, with the embedded process evaluation reported separately.MethodsLongitudinal, multi-site, pragmatic, cluster randomised controlled trial with a health economic analysis. Clusters are UK services randomised to CSNAT-Stroke intervention or usual care, stratified by size of service. Eligible carer participants are: adults aged >?18?years; able to communicate in English; referred to participating clusters; and seen face-to-face at least once by the provider, for support. The 'date seen' for initial support denotes the start of intervention (or control) and carers are referred to the research team after this for study recruitment. Primary outcome is caregiver strain (FACQ - Strain) at three months after 'date seen'. Secondary outcomes include: caregiver distress; positive caregiving appraisals (both FACQ subscales); Pound Carer Satisfaction with Services; mood (HADs); and health (EQ-5D5L) at three months. All outcomes are followed up at six months. Health economic analyses will use additional data on caregiver health service utilisation and informal care provision.DiscussionOSCARSS is open to recruitment at the time of article submission. Study findings will allow us to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of the CSNAT-Stroke intervention, directed at improving outcomes for informal carers of stroke survivors. Trial findings will be interpreted in the context of our embedded process evaluation including qualitative interviews with those who received and provided services as well as data on treatment fidelity. OSCARSS will contribute to knowledge of the unmet needs of informal stroke caregivers and inform future stroke service development.Trial registrationISRCTN Registry, ISRCTN58414120 . Registered on 26 July 2016.

Project description:BackgroundDespite the evidence that many stroke survivors report longer term unmet needs, the provision of longer term care is limited. To address this, we are conducting a programme of research to develop an evidence-based and replicable longer term care strategy. The developed complex intervention (named New Start), which includes needs identification, exploration of social networks and components of problem solving and self-management, was designed to improve quality of life by addressing unmet needs and increasing participation.Methods/designA multicentre, cluster randomised controlled feasibility trial designed to inform the design of a possible future definitive cluster randomised controlled trial (cRCT) and explore the potential clinical and cost-effectiveness of New Start. Ten stroke services across the UK will be randomised on a 1:1 basis either to implement New Start or continue with usual care only. New Start will be delivered by trained facilitators and will be offered to all stroke survivors within the services allocated to the intervention arm. Stroke survivors will be eligible for the trial if they are 4-6 months post-stroke and residing in the community. Carers (if available) will also be invited to take part. Invitation to participate will be initiated by post and outcome measures will be collected via postal questionnaires at 3, 6 and 9 months after recruitment. Outcome data relating to perceived health and disability, wellbeing and quality of life as well as unmet needs will be collected. A 'study within a trial' (SWAT) is planned to determine the most acceptable format in which to provide the postal questionnaires. Details of health and social care service usage will also be collected to inform the economic evaluation. The feasibility of recruiting services and stroke survivors to the trial and of collecting postal outcomes will be assessed and the potential for effectiveness will be investigated. An embedded process evaluation (reported separately) will assess implementation fidelity and explore and clarify causal assumptions regarding implementation.DiscussionThis feasibility trial with embedded process evaluation will allow us to gather important and detailed data regarding methodological and implementation issues to inform the design of a possible future definitive cRCT of this complex intervention.Trial registrationISRCTN38920246 . Registered 22 June 2016.

Project description:Tailoring stroke information and providing reinforcement opportunities are two strategies proposed to enhance the effectiveness of education. This study aimed to evaluate the effects of an education package which utilised both strategies on the knowledge, health and psychosocial outcomes of stroke patients and carers.Multisite, randomised trial comparing usual care with an education and support package.Two acute stroke units.Patients and their carers (N=138) were randomised (control n=67, intervention n=71) of which data for 119 participants (control n=59, intervention n=60) were analysed.The package consisted of a computer-generated, tailored written information booklet and verbal reinforcement provided prior to, and for 3 months following, discharge.Outcome measures were administered prior to hospital discharge and at 3-month follow-up by blinded assessors. The primary outcome was stroke knowledge (score range: 0-25). Secondary outcomes were: self-efficacy (1-10), anxiety and depression (0-21), ratings of importance of information (1-10), feelings of being informed (1-10), satisfaction with information (1-10), caregiver burden (carers) (0-13) and quality of life (patients) (1-5).Intervention group participants reported better: self-efficacy for accessing stroke information (adjusted mean difference (MD) of 1.0, 95% CI 0.3 to 1.7, p=0.004); feeling informed (MD 0.9, 95% CI 0.2 to 1.6, p=0.008); and satisfaction with medical (MD 2.0, 95% CI 1.1 to 2.8, p<0.001); practical (MD 1.1, 95% CI 0.3 to 1.9, p=0.008), services and benefits (MD 0.9, 95% CI 0.1 to 1.8, p=0.036) and secondary prevention information (MD 1.7, 95% CI 0.9 to 2.5, p<0.001). There was no significant effect on other outcomes.Intervention group participants had improved self-efficacy for accessing stroke information and satisfaction with information, but other outcomes were not significantly affected. Evaluation of a more intensive intervention in a trial with a larger sample size is required to establish the value of an educational intervention that uses tailoring and reinforcement strategies. ACTRN12608000469314.

Project description:INTRODUCTION:Prevention of overweight and obesity in childhood is a priority because of associated acute and chronic conditions in childhood and later in life, which place significant burden on health systems. Evidence suggests prevention should engage a range of actions and actors and target multiple levels. The Whole of Systems Trial Of Prevention Strategies for childhood obesity (WHO STOPS) will evaluate the outcomes of a novel systems-based intervention that aims to engage whole communities in a locally led multifaceted response. This paper describes the planned economic evaluation of WHO STOPS and examines the methodological challenges for economic evaluation of a complex systems-based intervention. METHODS AND ANALYSIS:Economic evaluation alongside a stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial in regional and rural communities in Victoria, Australia. Cost-effectiveness and cost-utility analyses will provide estimates of the incremental cost (in $A) per body mass index unit saved and quality adjusted life year gained. A Markov cohort model will be employed to estimate healthcare cost savings and benefits over the life course of children. The dollar value of community resources harnessed for the community-led response will be estimated. Probabilistic uncertainty analyses will be undertaken to test sensitivity of results to plausible variations in all trial-based and modelled variables. WHO STOPS will also be assessed against other implementation considerations (such as sustainability and acceptability to communities and other stakeholders). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION:The trial is registered by the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12616000980437). Full ethics clearances have been received for all methods described below: Deakin University's Human Research Ethics Committee 2014-279, Deakin University's Human Ethics Advisory Group-Health (HEAG-H) HEAG-H 194_2014, HEAG-H 17 2015, HEAG-H 155_2014, HEAG-H 197_2016, HEAG-H 118_2017, the Victorian Department of Education and Training 2015_002622 and the Catholic Archdiocese of Ballarat. Trial findings (including economic evaluation) will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at international conferences. Collected data and analyses will be made available in accordance with journal policies and study ethics approvals. Results will be presented to relevant government authorities with an interest in cost-effectiveness of these types of interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER:ACTRN12616000980437; Pre-results.

Project description:IntroductionReducing length of hospital stay for stroke survivors often creates a shift in the responsibility of care towards informal carers. Adjustment to the caregiving process is experienced by many carers as overwhelming, complex and demanding and can have a detrimental impact on mental and physical health and well-being. National policy guidelines recommend that carers' needs are considered and addressed; despite this, few interventions have been developed and empirically evaluated. We developed a biopsychosocial intervention in collaboration with carers of stroke survivors. Our aim is to determine whether the intervention can be delivered in a group setting and evaluated using a randomised controlled trial (RCT).Methods and analysisFeasibility RCT and nested qualitative interview study. We aim to recruit up to 40 stroke carers within 1?year of the stroke onset. Carers are randomised to usual care or usual care plus biopsychosocial intervention. Each intervention group will consist of five stroke carers. The intervention will focus on: psychoeducation, psychological adjustment to stroke, strategies for reducing unwanted negative thoughts and emotions and problem-solving strategies. The main outcome is the feasibility of conducting an RCT. Carer outcomes at 6?months include: anxiety and depression, quality of life and carer strain. Data are also collected from stroke survivors at baseline and 6?months including: level of disability, anxiety and depression, and quality of life.Ethics and disseminationFavourable ethical opinion was provided by East Midlands - Nottingham2 Research Ethics Committee (14/EMI/1264). This study will determine whether delivery of the biopsychosocial intervention is feasible and acceptable to stroke carers within a group format. It will also determine whether it is feasible to evaluate the effects of the biopsychosocial intervention in an RCT. We will disseminate our findings through peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national and international conferences.Trial registration numberISRCTN15643456; Pre-results.

Project description:BackgroundThe prevalence of knee osteoarthritis is increasing worldwide. Obesity is an important modifiable risk factor for both the incidence and progression of knee osteoarthritis. Consequently, international guidelines recommend all patients with knee osteoarthritis who are overweight receive support to lose weight. However, few overweight patients with this condition receive care to support weight loss. Telephone-based interventions are one potential solution to provide scalable care to the many patients with knee osteoarthritis. The objective of this study is to evaluate, from a societal perspective, the cost-utility and cost-effectiveness of a telephone-based weight management and healthy lifestyle service for patients with knee osteoarthritis, who are overweight or obese.MethodsAn economic evaluation was undertaken alongside a pragmatic randomised controlled trial. Between May 19 and June 30, 2015, 120 patients with knee osteoarthritis were randomly assigned to an intervention or usual care control group in a 1:1 ratio. Participants in the intervention group received a referral to an existing non-disease specific 6-month telephone-based weight management and healthy lifestyle service. Quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) was the utility measure and knee pain intensity, disability, weight, and body mass index (BMI) were the clinical measures of effect. Costs included intervention costs, healthcare utilisation costs (healthcare services and medication use) and absenteeism costs due to knee pain. Data was collected at baseline, 6?weeks and 26?weeks. The primary cost-effectiveness analysis was performed from the societal perspective.ResultsMean cost differences between groups (intervention minus control) were $493 (95%CI: -3513 to 5363) for healthcare costs, $-32 (95%CI: -73 to 13) for medication costs, and $125 (95%CI: -151 to 486) for absenteeism costs. The total mean difference in societal costs was $1197 (95%CI: -2887 to 6106). For QALYs and all clinical measures of effect, the probability of the intervention being cost-effective compared with usual care was less than 0.36 at all willingness-to-pay values.ConclusionsFrom a societal perspective, telephone-based weight loss support, provided using an existing non-disease specific 6-month weight management and healthy lifestyle service was not cost-effective in comparison with usual care for overweight and obese patients with knee osteoarthritis.Trial registration numberACTRN12615000490572 , registered 18th May 2015.

Project description:ObjectivesWhile very early mobilisation (VEM) intervention for stroke patients was shown not to be effective at 3 months, 12 month clinical and economical outcomes remain unknown. The aim was to assess cost-effectiveness of a VEM intervention within a phase III randomised controlled trial (RCT).DesignAn economic evaluation alongside a RCT, and detailed resource use and cost analysis over 12 months post-acute stroke.SettingMulti-country RCT involved 58 stroke centres.Participants2104 patients with acute stroke who were admitted to a stroke unit.InterventionA very early rehabilitation intervention within 24 hours of stroke onset METHODS: Cost-utility analyses were undertaken according to pre-specified protocol measuring VEM against usual care (UC) based on 12 month outcomes. The analysis was conducted using both health sector and societal perspectives. Unit costs were sourced from participating countries. Details on resource use (both health and non-health) were sourced from cost case report form. Dichotomised modified Rankin Scale (mRS) scores (0 to 2 vs 3 to 6) and quality adjusted-life years (QALYs) were used to compare the treatment effect of VEM and UC. The base case analysis was performed on an intention-to-treat basis and 95% CI for cost and QALYs were estimated by bootstrapping. Sensitivity analysis were conducted to examine the robustness of base case results.ResultsVEM and UC groups were comparable in the quantity of resource use and cost of each component. There were no differences in the probability of achieving a favourable mRS outcome (0.030, 95% CI -0.022 to 0.082), QALYs (0.013, 95% CI -0.041 to 0.016) and cost (AUD1082, 95% CI -$2520 to $4685 from a health sector perspective or AUD102, 95% CI -$6907 to $7111, from a societal perspective including productivity cost). Sensitivity analysis achieved results with mostly overlapped CIs.ConclusionsVEM and UC were associated with comparable costs, mRS outcome and QALY gains at 12 months. Compared with to UC, VEM is unlikely to be cost-effective. The long-term data collection during the trial also informed resource use and cost of care post-acute stroke across five participating countries.Trial registration numberACTRN12606000185561; Results.

Project description:BackgroundInformal carers frequently suffer adverse consequences from caring. General practice teams are well positioned to support them. However, what carers of stroke survivors want and expect from general practice, and the practical support measures they might like, remain largely unexplored.The aims of this study are twofold. Firstly it explores both the support stroke carers would like from general practice and their reactions to the community based support proposed in the New Deal. Secondly, perceptions of a general practice team are investigated covering similar topics to carer interviews but from their perspective.MethodsSemi-structured interviews were conducted with 13 stroke carers and 10 members of a general practice team. Carers' experiences and expectations of general practice and opinions of support measures from recent government policy were explored. General practice professionals were asked about their perceived role and their perceptions of carers' support needs. Interviews were content analysed.ResultsCarers' expectations of support from general practice were low and they neither received nor expected much support for themselves. General practice was seen as reactive primarily because of time constraints. Some carers would appreciate emotional support but others did not want additional services. Responses to recent policy initiatives were mixed with carers saying these might benefit other carers but not themselves.General practice professionals' opinions were broadly similar. They recognise carers' support needs but see their role as reactive, focussed on stroke survivors, rather than carers. Caring was recognised as challenging. Providing emotional support and referral were seen as important but identification of carers was considered difficult. Time constraints limit their support. Responses to recent policy initiatives were positive.ConclusionsCarers' expectations of support from general practice for themselves are low and teams are seen as reactive and time constrained. Both the carers and the general practice team participants emphasised the valuable role of general practice team in supporting stroke survivors. Research is needed to determine general practice teams' awareness and identification of carers and of the difficulties they encounter supporting stroke carers. Carer policy initiatives need greater specificity with greater attention to diversity in carer needs.

Project description:BackgroundLittle guidance exists regarding how best to upskill and support those delivering complex healthcare interventions to ensure robust trial outcomes and implementation fidelity. Mentoring was provided to occupational therapists (OTs) delivering a complex vocational rehabilitation (VR) intervention to stroke survivors. This study aimed to explore mentors' roles in supporting OTs with intervention delivery and fidelity, and to describe factors affecting the mentoring process and intervention delivery.MethodsQuantitative data (duration, mode and total time of mentoring support) was extracted from mentoring records and emails between mentors and OTs, alongside qualitative data on barriers and facilitators to intervention delivery. Semi-structured interviews with mentors (n = 6) and OTs (n = 19) explored experiences and perceptions of intervention training, delivery and the mentoring process. Mean total and monthly time spent mentoring were calculated per trial site. Qualitative data were analysed thematically.ResultsForty-one OTs across 16 sites were mentored between March 2018 and April 2020. Most mentoring was provided by phone or Microsoft Teams (range: 88.6-100%), with the remainder via email and SMS (Short Message Service) text messages. Mentors suggested strategies to enhance trial recruitment, improved OTs' understanding of- and adherence to trial processes, intervention delivery and fidelity, and facilitated independent problem-solving. Barriers to mentoring included OT non-attendance at mentoring sessions and mentors struggling to balance mentoring with clinical roles. Facilitators included support from the trial team and mentors having protected time for mentoring.ConclusionsMentoring supported mentee OTs in various ways, but it remains unclear to what extent the OTS would have been able to deliver the intervention without mentoring support, or how this might have impacted fidelity. Successful implementation of mentoring alongside new complex interventions may increase the likelihood of intervention effectiveness being observed and sustained in real-life contexts. Further research is needed to investigate how mentors could be selected, upskilled, funded and mentoring provided to maximise impact. The clinical- and cost-effectiveness of mentoring as an implementation strategy and its impact on fidelity also requires testing in a future trial.Trial registrationISRCTN, ISRCTN12464275 . Registered on 13th March 2018.

Dataset Information

Organising Support for Carers of Stroke Survivors (OSCARSS): a cluster randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation.

Objective

Design

Setting

Participants

Interventions

Outcome measures

Primary outcome

Secondary outcomes

Randomisation and masking

Results

Primary outcome measure

Conclusions

Trial registration number

Publications

Organising Support for Carers of Stroke Survivors (OSCARSS): a cluster randomised controlled trial with economic evaluation.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets