liu.seSearch for publications in DiVA
Change search
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf
Characteristics of the Family Caregivers Who Did Not Benefit From a Successful Psychoeducational Group Intervention During Palliative Cancer Care A Prospective Correlational Study
Karolinska Institute, Sweden; Ersta Skondal University of Coll, Sweden.
Linköping University, Department of Medical and Health Sciences, Division of Nursing Science. Linköping University, Faculty of Medicine and Health Sciences. Linnaeus University, Sweden.
Ersta Sköndal University of Coll, Sweden; Karolinska Institute, Sweden.
Karolinska Institute, Sweden; University of Örebro, Sweden.
Show others and affiliations
2017 (English)In: CANCER NURSING, ISSN 0162-220X, Vol. 40, no 1, 76-83 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

Background: Although there has been a steady increase in intervention studies aimed toward supporting family caregivers in palliative cancer care, they often report modest effect sizes and there is a lack of knowledge about possible barriers to intervention effectiveness. Objective: The aim of this study is to explore the characteristics of family caregivers who did not benefit from a successful psychoeducational group intervention compared with the characteristics of those who did. Intervention/Methods: A psychoeducational intervention for family caregivers was delivered at 10 palliative settings in Sweden. Questionnaires were used to collect data at baseline and following the intervention. The Preparedness for Caregiving Scale was the main outcome for the study and was used to decide whether or not the family caregiver had benefited from the intervention (Preparedness for Caregiving Scale difference score amp;lt;= 0 vs amp;gt;= 1). Results: A total of 82 family caregivers completed the intervention and follow-up. Caregivers who did not benefit from the intervention had significantly higher ratings of their preparedness and competence for caregiving and their health at baseline compared with the group who benefited. They also experienced lower levels of environmental burden and a trend toward fewer symptoms of depression. Conclusions: Family caregivers who did not benefit from the intervention tended to be less vulnerable at baseline. Hence, the potential to improve their ratings was smaller than for the group who did benefit. Implications for Practice: Determining family caregivers in cancer and palliative care who are more likely to benefit from an intervention needs to be explored further in research.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS , 2017. Vol. 40, no 1, 76-83 p.
Keyword [en]
Family Caregivers; Intervention Studies; Palliative Care; Randomized Controlled Trial
National Category
Nursing
Identifiers
URN: urn:nbn:se:liu:diva-134068DOI: 10.1097/NCC.0000000000000351ISI: 000390692300015PubMedID: 26925988OAI: oai:DiVA.org:liu-134068DiVA: diva2:1068922
Available from: 2017-01-26 Created: 2017-01-22 Last updated: 2017-02-20

Open Access in DiVA

The full text will be freely available from 2018-01-01 13:56
Available from 2018-01-01 13:56

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
Årestedt, Kristofer
By organisation
Division of Nursing ScienceFaculty of Medicine and Health Sciences
Nursing

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn

Altmetric score

doi
pubmed
urn-nbn
Total: 31 hits
CiteExportLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Cite
Citation style
  • apa
  • harvard1
  • ieee
  • modern-language-association-8th-edition
  • vancouver
  • oxford
  • Other style
More styles
Language
  • de-DE
  • en-GB
  • en-US
  • fi-FI
  • nn-NO
  • nn-NB
  • sv-SE
  • Other locale
More languages
Output format
  • html
  • text
  • asciidoc
  • rtf