Systematic Review of the Evidence for Stroke Family Caregiver and Dyad Interventions
Stroke family caregiver and dyad literature has expanded over the past few years. The purpose of this review was to build upon 2 prior systematic reviews to critique, analyze, and synthesize the evidence pertaining to the impact of family caregiver and dyad interventions on stroke survivor and famil...
Gespeichert in:
| Veröffentlicht in: | Stroke (1970) 2022-06, Vol.53 (6), p.2093-2102 |
|---|---|
| Hauptverfasser: | , , |
| Format: | Artikel |
| Sprache: | eng |
| Schlagworte: | |
| Online-Zugang: | Volltext |
| Tags: |
Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
|
| container_end_page | 2102 |
|---|---|
| container_issue | 6 |
| container_start_page | 2093 |
| container_title | Stroke (1970) |
| container_volume | 53 |
| creator | Bakas, Tamilyn McCarthy, Michael J. Miller, Elaine L. |
| description | Stroke family caregiver and dyad literature has expanded over the past few years. The purpose of this review was to build upon 2 prior systematic reviews to critique, analyze, and synthesize the evidence pertaining to the impact of family caregiver and dyad interventions on stroke survivor and family caregiver outcomes. CINAHL, PsychINFO, PubMed, and reference lists were searched from December 1, 2016 through March 31, 2021. Using PRISMA guidelines (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses), articles were identified that tested outcomes from stroke family caregiver or dyad interventions that targeted the health or well-being of family caregivers. Data from the articles were abstracted into tables for analysis, then compared with recommendations from the 2 prior systematic reviews. A total of 18 articles met inclusion criteria (10 caregiver interventions; 8 dyad interventions) representing sample sizes ranging from 7 to 349 caregivers or dyads. Most were randomized controlled trials (n=13); 2 were cluster randomized trials; and 3 were single-group quasi-experimental designs. Of the 18 studies, 8 had |
| doi_str_mv | 10.1161/STROKEAHA.121.034090 |
| format | Article |
| fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>proquest_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9133104</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><sourcerecordid>2638022847</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4539-baaba21c1ab448671a98d28d2c92a9289b97fdacdf92388f432380ece9530873</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNpVkVtrGzEQhUVpady0_6AUPfZlndFlL3opGNdpQgOB2O9Cq52N1eyuUmm9xv--Mk7cFgaGYTTnHPQR8pnBnLGCXa03D_c_V4ubxZxxNgchQcEbMmM5l5ksePWWzACEyrhU6oJ8iPEXAHBR5e_Jhch5IYHBjGzWhzhib0Zn6QNODvfUt3TcIl1NrsHBIm19oOsx-Cek16Z33YEuTcBHN2GgZmjo94Np6O0wYphwGJ0f4kfyrjVdxE8v_ZJsrleb5U12d__jdrm4y6zMU7LamNpwZpmppayKkhlVNTyVVdwoXqlalW1jbNOqlLtqpUgN0KLKBVSluCTfTrLPu7rHxib3YDr9HFxvwkF74_T_m8Ft9aOftGJCMJBJ4OuLQPC_dxhH3btosevMgH4XNS-SH-eVPHrJ01MbfIwB27MNA33koc88dOKhTzzS2Zd_I56PXgH81d37Lv1gfOp2ewx6i6YbtzoRg7IoIeMpBhRpyuAIVfwBKn-X2g</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2638022847</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Systematic Review of the Evidence for Stroke Family Caregiver and Dyad Interventions</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>American Heart Association Journals</source><source>Journals@Ovid Complete</source><source>EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals</source><source>Alma/SFX Local Collection</source><creator>Bakas, Tamilyn ; McCarthy, Michael J. ; Miller, Elaine L.</creator><creatorcontrib>Bakas, Tamilyn ; McCarthy, Michael J. ; Miller, Elaine L.</creatorcontrib><description>Stroke family caregiver and dyad literature has expanded over the past few years. The purpose of this review was to build upon 2 prior systematic reviews to critique, analyze, and synthesize the evidence pertaining to the impact of family caregiver and dyad interventions on stroke survivor and family caregiver outcomes. CINAHL, PsychINFO, PubMed, and reference lists were searched from December 1, 2016 through March 31, 2021. Using PRISMA guidelines (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses), articles were identified that tested outcomes from stroke family caregiver or dyad interventions that targeted the health or well-being of family caregivers. Data from the articles were abstracted into tables for analysis, then compared with recommendations from the 2 prior systematic reviews. A total of 18 articles met inclusion criteria (10 caregiver interventions; 8 dyad interventions) representing sample sizes ranging from 7 to 349 caregivers or dyads. Most were randomized controlled trials (n=13); 2 were cluster randomized trials; and 3 were single-group quasi-experimental designs. Of the 18 studies, 8 had <50 caregivers or dyads and 5 were small feasibility studies that reported data trends rather than testing for significance. Only 6 studies reported significant survivor outcomes. Eleven studies reported significant caregiver outcomes, the most common being burden. A number of survivor and caregiver outcomes were not significant, or only significant for certain subgroups. The limited number of studies, small sample sizes, and conflicting results, made it difficult to draw firm conclusions regarding the impact of these interventions on outcomes. Based on the available evidence from these 18 studies, recommendations from the 2 prior reviews were generally supported. Well-designed and well-powered randomized controlled clinical trials are still needed to confirm efficacy of stroke family caregiver and dyad interventions.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0039-2499</identifier><identifier>ISSN: 1524-4628</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1524-4628</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1161/STROKEAHA.121.034090</identifier><identifier>PMID: 35264010</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins</publisher><subject>Caregivers ; Humans ; Stroke - therapy ; Survivors</subject><ispartof>Stroke (1970), 2022-06, Vol.53 (6), p.2093-2102</ispartof><rights>Lippincott Williams & Wilkins</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4539-baaba21c1ab448671a98d28d2c92a9289b97fdacdf92388f432380ece9530873</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c4539-baaba21c1ab448671a98d28d2c92a9289b97fdacdf92388f432380ece9530873</cites><orcidid>0000-0002-3235-5012 ; 0000-0002-9074-7452 ; 0000-0001-9212-776X</orcidid></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><link.rule.ids>230,314,780,784,885,3687,27924,27925</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35264010$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Bakas, Tamilyn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McCarthy, Michael J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miller, Elaine L.</creatorcontrib><title>Systematic Review of the Evidence for Stroke Family Caregiver and Dyad Interventions</title><title>Stroke (1970)</title><addtitle>Stroke</addtitle><description>Stroke family caregiver and dyad literature has expanded over the past few years. The purpose of this review was to build upon 2 prior systematic reviews to critique, analyze, and synthesize the evidence pertaining to the impact of family caregiver and dyad interventions on stroke survivor and family caregiver outcomes. CINAHL, PsychINFO, PubMed, and reference lists were searched from December 1, 2016 through March 31, 2021. Using PRISMA guidelines (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses), articles were identified that tested outcomes from stroke family caregiver or dyad interventions that targeted the health or well-being of family caregivers. Data from the articles were abstracted into tables for analysis, then compared with recommendations from the 2 prior systematic reviews. A total of 18 articles met inclusion criteria (10 caregiver interventions; 8 dyad interventions) representing sample sizes ranging from 7 to 349 caregivers or dyads. Most were randomized controlled trials (n=13); 2 were cluster randomized trials; and 3 were single-group quasi-experimental designs. Of the 18 studies, 8 had <50 caregivers or dyads and 5 were small feasibility studies that reported data trends rather than testing for significance. Only 6 studies reported significant survivor outcomes. Eleven studies reported significant caregiver outcomes, the most common being burden. A number of survivor and caregiver outcomes were not significant, or only significant for certain subgroups. The limited number of studies, small sample sizes, and conflicting results, made it difficult to draw firm conclusions regarding the impact of these interventions on outcomes. Based on the available evidence from these 18 studies, recommendations from the 2 prior reviews were generally supported. Well-designed and well-powered randomized controlled clinical trials are still needed to confirm efficacy of stroke family caregiver and dyad interventions.</description><subject>Caregivers</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Stroke - therapy</subject><subject>Survivors</subject><issn>0039-2499</issn><issn>1524-4628</issn><issn>1524-4628</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2022</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNpVkVtrGzEQhUVpady0_6AUPfZlndFlL3opGNdpQgOB2O9Cq52N1eyuUmm9xv--Mk7cFgaGYTTnHPQR8pnBnLGCXa03D_c_V4ubxZxxNgchQcEbMmM5l5ksePWWzACEyrhU6oJ8iPEXAHBR5e_Jhch5IYHBjGzWhzhib0Zn6QNODvfUt3TcIl1NrsHBIm19oOsx-Cek16Z33YEuTcBHN2GgZmjo94Np6O0wYphwGJ0f4kfyrjVdxE8v_ZJsrleb5U12d__jdrm4y6zMU7LamNpwZpmppayKkhlVNTyVVdwoXqlalW1jbNOqlLtqpUgN0KLKBVSluCTfTrLPu7rHxib3YDr9HFxvwkF74_T_m8Ft9aOftGJCMJBJ4OuLQPC_dxhH3btosevMgH4XNS-SH-eVPHrJ01MbfIwB27MNA33koc88dOKhTzzS2Zd_I56PXgH81d37Lv1gfOp2ewx6i6YbtzoRg7IoIeMpBhRpyuAIVfwBKn-X2g</recordid><startdate>20220601</startdate><enddate>20220601</enddate><creator>Bakas, Tamilyn</creator><creator>McCarthy, Michael J.</creator><creator>Miller, Elaine L.</creator><general>Lippincott Williams & Wilkins</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3235-5012</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9074-7452</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9212-776X</orcidid></search><sort><creationdate>20220601</creationdate><title>Systematic Review of the Evidence for Stroke Family Caregiver and Dyad Interventions</title><author>Bakas, Tamilyn ; McCarthy, Michael J. ; Miller, Elaine L.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c4539-baaba21c1ab448671a98d28d2c92a9289b97fdacdf92388f432380ece9530873</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2022</creationdate><topic>Caregivers</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Stroke - therapy</topic><topic>Survivors</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Bakas, Tamilyn</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>McCarthy, Michael J.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Miller, Elaine L.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>Stroke (1970)</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Bakas, Tamilyn</au><au>McCarthy, Michael J.</au><au>Miller, Elaine L.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Systematic Review of the Evidence for Stroke Family Caregiver and Dyad Interventions</atitle><jtitle>Stroke (1970)</jtitle><addtitle>Stroke</addtitle><date>2022-06-01</date><risdate>2022</risdate><volume>53</volume><issue>6</issue><spage>2093</spage><epage>2102</epage><pages>2093-2102</pages><issn>0039-2499</issn><issn>1524-4628</issn><eissn>1524-4628</eissn><abstract>Stroke family caregiver and dyad literature has expanded over the past few years. The purpose of this review was to build upon 2 prior systematic reviews to critique, analyze, and synthesize the evidence pertaining to the impact of family caregiver and dyad interventions on stroke survivor and family caregiver outcomes. CINAHL, PsychINFO, PubMed, and reference lists were searched from December 1, 2016 through March 31, 2021. Using PRISMA guidelines (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses), articles were identified that tested outcomes from stroke family caregiver or dyad interventions that targeted the health or well-being of family caregivers. Data from the articles were abstracted into tables for analysis, then compared with recommendations from the 2 prior systematic reviews. A total of 18 articles met inclusion criteria (10 caregiver interventions; 8 dyad interventions) representing sample sizes ranging from 7 to 349 caregivers or dyads. Most were randomized controlled trials (n=13); 2 were cluster randomized trials; and 3 were single-group quasi-experimental designs. Of the 18 studies, 8 had <50 caregivers or dyads and 5 were small feasibility studies that reported data trends rather than testing for significance. Only 6 studies reported significant survivor outcomes. Eleven studies reported significant caregiver outcomes, the most common being burden. A number of survivor and caregiver outcomes were not significant, or only significant for certain subgroups. The limited number of studies, small sample sizes, and conflicting results, made it difficult to draw firm conclusions regarding the impact of these interventions on outcomes. Based on the available evidence from these 18 studies, recommendations from the 2 prior reviews were generally supported. Well-designed and well-powered randomized controlled clinical trials are still needed to confirm efficacy of stroke family caregiver and dyad interventions.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Lippincott Williams & Wilkins</pub><pmid>35264010</pmid><doi>10.1161/STROKEAHA.121.034090</doi><tpages>10</tpages><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3235-5012</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0002-9074-7452</orcidid><orcidid>https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9212-776X</orcidid><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
| fulltext | fulltext |
| identifier | ISSN: 0039-2499 |
| ispartof | Stroke (1970), 2022-06, Vol.53 (6), p.2093-2102 |
| issn | 0039-2499 1524-4628 1524-4628 |
| language | eng |
| recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_9133104 |
| source | MEDLINE; American Heart Association Journals; Journals@Ovid Complete; EZB-FREE-00999 freely available EZB journals; Alma/SFX Local Collection |
| subjects | Caregivers Humans Stroke - therapy Survivors |
| title | Systematic Review of the Evidence for Stroke Family Caregiver and Dyad Interventions |
| url | https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2024-12-23T20%3A01%3A06IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Systematic%20Review%20of%20the%20Evidence%20for%20Stroke%20Family%20Caregiver%20and%20Dyad%20Interventions&rft.jtitle=Stroke%20(1970)&rft.au=Bakas,%20Tamilyn&rft.date=2022-06-01&rft.volume=53&rft.issue=6&rft.spage=2093&rft.epage=2102&rft.pages=2093-2102&rft.issn=0039-2499&rft.eissn=1524-4628&rft_id=info:doi/10.1161/STROKEAHA.121.034090&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_pubme%3E2638022847%3C/proquest_pubme%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2638022847&rft_id=info:pmid/35264010&rfr_iscdi=true |