Dataset Information

An Evaluation of Natural Environment Interventions for Informal Cancer Caregivers in the Community.

ABSTRACT: Home-based informal caregiving by friends and family members of patients with cancer is be-coming increasingly common globally with rates continuing to rise. Such caregiving is often emo-tionally and cognitively demanding, resulting in mental exhaustion and high perceived burden. Support for caregivers may be fostered by engagement with the natural environment. Interaction with nature is associated with mental health benefits such as stress reduction and improved well-being. The purpose of this paper was to evaluate the state of the science regarding the use of nat-ural environment interventions to support caregivers of cancer patients in the community. A comprehensive scoping review using the Arksey and O'Malley framework and the Preferred Re-porting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses assessed natural environment therapies and mental health outcomes among cancer caregivers. Databases searched included CINAHL, PubMed, Scopus, Cochrane, and Alt HealthWatch. Findings recovered a total of five studies over a 10-year period that met criteria, demonstrating a lack of empirical evidence addressing this po-tential resource to support caregivers. Often, study appraisal was not on nature exposure, but ra-ther other aspects of the projects such as program evaluation, exercise, or complementary thera-pies. Both qualitative and quantitative designs were used but sample sizes were small. Caregivers experienced beneficial results across the various studies and future work could enhance these findings.

SUBMITTER: Lehto RH

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8583496 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionAgeing in place, supported by formal home and community services and informal caregivers, is the most used long-term care option for people with dementia (PwD). Informal caregivers are inundated by their caregiving responsibilities and resultantly suffer consequences. Despite the multitude of clinical effectiveness studies on interventions that support informal caregivers, there is a paucity of information regarding their implementation process. This scoping review aims to identify the implementation strategies, implementation outcomes, and barriers and facilitators that impede or support the dissemination and uptake of interventions that support informal caregivers of PwD at home.Methods and analysisThis protocol is guided by the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) Protocols, and the scoping review will follow the systematic steps of the PRISMA-Extension for Scoping Reviews guideline. The search strategy will include publications produced from inception to 8 March 2021 and will be conducted in the search engines Embase, Medline (Ovid), Web of Science and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (Wiley), followed by a three-stage approach. First, title and abstracts will be screened by two independent reviewers. Second, full-text articles will also be screened by both reviewers and, in case of disagreement, by a third reviewer. The first two stages are based on a set of inclusion and exclusion criteria. Reference lists of the final included studies will also be checked for relevant articles. Data from the final included studies will be extracted and synthesised using the Expert Recommendations for Implementing Change compilation and Proctor's implementation outcomes to ensure homogenous and standardised reporting of implementation information.Ethics and disseminationThe review findings will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and disseminated at geriatric and implementation conferences to inform researchers, health service planners and practice professionals with an overview of the existing literature to guide them in the effective implementation of caregiver-focused interventions in dementia support.

Project description:BackgroundInformal caregivers of critically ill patients in intensive care unit (ICUs) experience negative psychological sequelae that worsen after death. We synthesized outcomes reported from ICU bereavement interventions intended to improve informal caregivers' ability to cope with grief.Data sourcesMEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL and PsycINFO from inception to October 2020.Study selectionRandomized controlled trials (RCTs) of bereavement interventions to support informal caregivers of adult patients who died in ICU.Data extractionTwo reviewers independently extracted data in duplicate. Narrative synthesis was conducted.Data synthesisBereavement interventions were categorized according to the UK National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence three-tiered model of bereavement support according to the level of need: (1) Universal information provided to all those bereaved; (2) Selected or targeted non-specialist support provided to those who are at-risk of developing complex needs; and/or (3) Professional specialist interventions provided to those with a high level of complex needs. Outcome measures were synthesized according to core outcomes established for evaluating bereavement support for adults who have lost other adults to illness.ResultsThree studies of ICU bereavement interventions from 31 ICUs across 26 hospitals were included. One trial examining the effect of family presence at brain death assessment integrated all three categories of support but did not report significant improvement in emotional or psychological distress. Two other trials assessed a condolence letter intervention, which did not decrease grief symptoms and may have increased symptoms of depression and post-traumatic stress disorder, and a storytelling intervention that found no significant improvements in anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress, or complicated grief. Four of nine core bereavement outcomes were not assessed anytime in follow-up.ConclusionsCurrently available trial evidence is sparse and does not support the use of bereavement interventions for informal caregivers of critically ill patients who die in the ICU.

Project description:BackgroundLung cancer is one of the common cancers and the leading cause of death. Tremendous caregiving burden of informal caregivers of lung cancer causes psychological disorders, such as anxiety and depression. Interventions for informal caregivers of patients with lung cancer to improve their psychological health, which ultimately leads to patients' positive health outcomes, are crucial. A systematic review and meta-analysis was conducted to: 1) evaluate the effect of non-pharmacological interventions on the outcomes of depression and anxiety for lung cancer patients' informal caregivers; and 2) compare the effects of interventions with differing characteristics (i.e. intervention types, mode of contact, and group versus individual delivery).MethodsFour databases were searched to identify relevant studies. Inclusion criteria for the articles were peer-reviewed non-pharmacological intervention studies on depression and anxiety in lung cancer patients' informal caregivers published between January 2010 and April 2022. Systematic review procedures were followed. Data analysis of related studies was conducted using the Review Manager Version 5.4 software. Intervention effect sizes and studies' heterogeneity were calculated.ResultsEight studies from our search were eligible for inclusion. Regarding total effect for the caregivers' levels of anxiety and depression, results revealed evidence for significant moderate effects of intervention on anxiety (SMD -0.44; 95% CI, -0.67, -0.21; p = 0.0002) and depression (SMD -0.46; 95% CI, -0.74, -0.18; p = 0.001). Subgroup analyses for both anxiety and depression of informal caregivers revealed moderate to high significant effects for specific intervention types (cognitive behavioral and mindfulness combined with psycho-education interventions), mode of contact (telephone-based interventions), and group versus individual delivery.ConclusionThis review provides evidence that cognitive behavioral and mindfulness-based, telephone-based, individual or group-based interventions were effective for informal caregivers of lung cancer patients. Further research is needed to develop the most effective intervention contents and delivery methods across informal caregivers with larger sample size in randomized controlled trials.

Project description:Background: Informal caregivers are individuals who provide care for ill, frail, or otherwise dependent family members, siblings, or friends. Due to the caregiving demands, informal caregivers are known to experience negative mental health symptoms, such as stress or anxiety. Interventions based on Internet-based Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (ICBT) principles have been previously found to be effective for different populations and could also be considered as a plausible support option for informal caregivers. However, findings regarding effectiveness alone might not be sufficient for informing about the overall feasibility of the intervention. Objective: The aim of this process evaluation study was to evaluate the feasibility of a previously developed ICBT intervention for informal caregivers in Lithuania. More specifically, we evaluated the suitability of the intervention in relation to its content and delivery mode. Methods: Two studies were conducted. Study 1 consisted of participant evaluations of an 8-week, 8-module long therapist supported ICBT intervention. Evaluations for the Study 1 were retrieved from previously unused data, obtained from pilot testing of the intervention in which 63 informal caregivers took part. The evaluations contained of qualitative data (participant comments), as well as quantitative data (evaluations of each of the sessions). The Study 2 was an online stakeholder focus-group discussion conducted via Zoom. Eight stakeholders took part in the discussion, among whom there were social workers, medical professionals as well as individuals with caregiving experience themselves. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, thematic analysis, and data coding. Results: Results of the Study 1 showed that most of the pilot randomized controlled trial participants evaluated content and format of the intervention positively. These results were complemented by the findings in the Study 2, in which stakeholders evaluated the intervention as suitable and promising. In addition, stakeholders made certain suggestions for improving the intervention's usability for the informal caregivers. This included improving the instructions, providing with more guidance, and considering personalization options. Conclusion: The process evaluation helped to evaluate the feasibility of the ICBT intervention for informal caregivers in Lithuania from the two perspectives: users and stakeholders. Our findings suggest that the intervention is suitable for the target population.

Project description:BackgroundPeople with disabilities and without natural speech often rely on care provided by informal caregivers. The caregiving situation of these informal caregivers has been poorly researched. The objectives of the study are 1) to identify stressors, resources, and coping strategies among informal caregivers of people without natural speech and 2) to examine whether a complex intervention in augmentative and alternative communication (AAC) that is not primarily tailored to the needs of informal caregivers can reduce care-related burden.MethodsThe main components of the AAC intervention were (1) initial counselling session, (2) 4 AAC training sessions, (3) 20 AAC therapy sessions and (4) accompanying case management. The control group received only the initial counselling session. Within a quasi-experimental intervention study, survey data on self-perceived burden (Burden Scale for Family Caregivers, BSFC-s) from n = 154 informal caregivers of people without natural speech were collected at three time points between June 2018 and April 2021 from a postal survey. Qualitative interviews with n = 16 informal caregivers were conducted.ResultsCaregivers reported various stressors such as limited communication with the cared-for person and concerns about the living situation in adulthood. Diverse resources and effective coping strategies, which the caregivers refer to when dealing with stressors, could also be identified. Burden was significantly reduced in the intervention group compared to the control group. According to the results of the qualitative study, AAC use led to better communication skills and a reduction in behavioural problems and thus a decreased burden.ConclusionsThe AAC intervention seems to have a positive impact on self-perceived burden. Linkages between intervention components and burden reduction as well as stressors and coping strategies could be identified and provide an evidence-based foundation for developing future holistic interventions for families with individuals without natural speech.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register (DRKS); ID: DRKS00013628 (registered on 05/02/2018).

Project description:ObjectivesIt is unclear whether remote interventions are effective in improving outcomes of informal caregivers of patients who had a stroke. We synthesised evidence for the impact of remote interventions on informal caregivers of patients who had a stroke. Moreover, we also analysed its potential effects on patients who had a stroke.DesignSystematic review and meta-analysis.Data sourcesPubMed, Excerpta Medica Database, Web of Science, the Cochrane Library, China National Knowledge Infrastructure, Wanfang Database and China Science and Technology Journal Database were searched from inception up to 1 February 2022.Eligibility criteriaWe included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that assessed the effect of remote interventions on informal caregivers who provide unpaid care for patients who had a stroke living at home compared with traditional interventions, including with respect to caregivers' mood, care burden, life satisfaction and perceived competence. Moreover, we considered the potential impact of remote interventions on the depressive and anxiety symptoms, functional rehabilitation and re-admission of patients who had a stroke. Only studies published in Chinese or English were included. We excluded studies of interventions aimed at healthcare professionals or patients who had a stroke and those that could not provide complete data.Data extraction and synthesisData analyses were performed using RevMan V.5.3. The Cochrane Collaboration risk of bias tool for RCTs was used to evaluate the quality of the included studies, and the review is reported according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines. For continuous outcomes, we calculated the mean difference or standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% CIs. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluations method was used to assess the certainty of the evidence.ResultsEight RCTs with a total of 733 participants were included. Compared with traditional interventions, for informal caregivers, we found that remote interventions did not produce significant effects on depressive symptoms (SMD -0.04, 95% CI -0.24 to 0.15), anxiety symptoms (SMD -0.26, 95% CI -0.94 to 0.43), care burden (SMD -0.06, 95% CI -0.56 to 0.45), life satisfaction (SMD -0.16, 95% CI -0.43 to 0.11), or perceived competence (SMD 0.37, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.96). Similarly, for patients who had a stroke, remote interventions had no significant effect on depression (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.61 to 0.93) or anxiety symptoms (SMD -0.34, 95% CI -0.72 to 0.04). The effects of remote interventions on functional rehabilitation and re-admission in patients who had a stroke were evaluated by three studies and two studies, respectively, but the studies were too varied to combine their data in meta-analysis.ConclusionsCurrent evidence suggests that remote interventions for informal caregivers of patients who had a stroke have no significant superiority over traditional interventions. However, the quality of the included studies was low and more high-quality evidence is required to determine the possible impacts of remote interventions.Prospero registration numberCRD42022313544.

Dataset Information

An Evaluation of Natural Environment Interventions for Informal Cancer Caregivers in the Community.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets