How can informal caregivers in cancer and palliative care be supported? An updated systematic literature review of interventions and their effectiveness

TY - JOUR

T1 - How can informal caregivers in cancer and palliative care be supported? An updated systematic literature review of interventions and their effectiveness

AU - Harding, Richard

AU - List, Sally

AU - Epiphaniou, Eleni

AU - Jones, Hannah

PY - 2012/1

Y1 - 2012/1

N2 - Introduction: Informal caregivers needs in cancer/advanced disease are largely unmet. The science of carer intervention evaluation is methodologically challenging, and the evidence historically weak. Objective: This systematic review updates an earlier effectiveness review to determine both the effectiveness of subsequently published intervention studies, and the current state of science. Method: The evidence was identified and appraised using a comprehensive search strategy. Articles were searched from 2001 to 2010 using the following electronic databases: Medline, PsychINFO and CINAHL. Inclusion criteria were studies reporting intervention data for informal adult caregivers of a patient with a diagnosis of cancer or receiving palliative care. The design and evidence rigour were assessed using the Jadad Rating Scale, and the Quality Rating Scale. Results: 33 studies met inclusion criteria. From the original review, an encouraging increase was identified in the number of evaluations (from 8 to 33), in carer-specific interventions (from 6 to 17) and in the robustness of the study design (an increase from 2 to 12 studies with before/after measures, comparison groups and prospective data). Conclusions: The evidence suggests a rapid increase in the number of robust intervention studies. However, the range of models remains narrow in relation to caregivers' needs and preferences.

AB - Introduction: Informal caregivers needs in cancer/advanced disease are largely unmet. The science of carer intervention evaluation is methodologically challenging, and the evidence historically weak. Objective: This systematic review updates an earlier effectiveness review to determine both the effectiveness of subsequently published intervention studies, and the current state of science. Method: The evidence was identified and appraised using a comprehensive search strategy. Articles were searched from 2001 to 2010 using the following electronic databases: Medline, PsychINFO and CINAHL. Inclusion criteria were studies reporting intervention data for informal adult caregivers of a patient with a diagnosis of cancer or receiving palliative care. The design and evidence rigour were assessed using the Jadad Rating Scale, and the Quality Rating Scale. Results: 33 studies met inclusion criteria. From the original review, an encouraging increase was identified in the number of evaluations (from 8 to 33), in carer-specific interventions (from 6 to 17) and in the robustness of the study design (an increase from 2 to 12 studies with before/after measures, comparison groups and prospective data). Conclusions: The evidence suggests a rapid increase in the number of robust intervention studies. However, the range of models remains narrow in relation to caregivers' needs and preferences.

U2 - 10.1177/0269216311409613

DO - 10.1177/0269216311409613

M3 - Literature review

VL - 26

SP - 7

EP - 22

JO - Palliative Medicine

JF - Palliative Medicine

IS - 1

ER -