http://isrctn.org/> 2012
DOI: 10.1186/isrctn08130075
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Does befriending by trained lay workers improve psychological well-being and quality of life for carers of people with dementia, and at what cost?: a randomised controlled trial.

Abstract: Non-UK purchasers will have to pay a small fee for post and packing. For European countries the cost is £2 per monograph and for the rest of the world £3 per monograph.You can order HTA monographs from our Despatch Agents:-fax (with credit card or official purchase order) -post (with credit card or official purchase order or cheque) -phone during office hours (credit card only).Additionally the HTA website allows you either to pay securely by credit card or to print out your order and then post or fax it. Con… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
2
1

Citation Types

0
46
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2022
2022

Publication Types

Select...
9

Relationship

2
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 22 publications
(46 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
0
46
0
Order By: Relevance
“…No significant difference found in outcomes, but values not reported in paperHealth, social car and long-term careNo ratio reported as no significant difference in outcomes. On average intervention programme would have higher costs of €1525 but this was not statistically significantC: Usual care24 monthsCEADeemed to have only a 10% chance of being cost-effective(Charlesworth et al , 2008) and Wilson et al (2009), EnglandI: Access to an employed befriending, facilitator and then offer of befriend in addition to usual care236 carers of people with dementia (PwD). Mean age of carers was 68 years (range 36–91 years) and the mean age of PwD was older at 78 yearsRCTTotal intervention cost at 15 months £122, 665; control group £120, 852.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…No significant difference found in outcomes, but values not reported in paperHealth, social car and long-term careNo ratio reported as no significant difference in outcomes. On average intervention programme would have higher costs of €1525 but this was not statistically significantC: Usual care24 monthsCEADeemed to have only a 10% chance of being cost-effective(Charlesworth et al , 2008) and Wilson et al (2009), EnglandI: Access to an employed befriending, facilitator and then offer of befriend in addition to usual care236 carers of people with dementia (PwD). Mean age of carers was 68 years (range 36–91 years) and the mean age of PwD was older at 78 yearsRCTTotal intervention cost at 15 months £122, 665; control group £120, 852.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Neither a home visit programme by nurses in the Netherlands nor a programme to promote the befriending of older people in England was found to be effective or cost-effective (Bouman et al ., 2008a, b; Charlesworth et al , 2008; Wilson et al , 2009). We did identify a cost–utility analysis from the Netherlands conducted alongside a randomized controlled trial comparing a home visiting service provided by trained volunteers with a brochure providing information on depression (Onrust et al , 2008).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The intervention was originally based on a model of collaboration and partnership with a local voluntary carer support organisation [25]. The research team worked with a Carer Supporter Manager (CS Manager), based within a host voluntary sector organisation, to develop the CSP intervention.…”
Section: Designmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…cost per additional year that the person with dementia lived at home). Three studies [3638] included a cost‐utility analysis using three generic health measures suitable for QALY calculations: the EQ‐5D [36], Health Utility Index-2 (HUI2) [37] and the Caregiver Quality of Life Instrument [38]. Since the decision to use a specific QoL measure has implications on its cost-effectiveness, the authors suggest that health economists select instruments appropriate to their intended population and outcomes of interest, and that clinical trialists consider ease of administration, time constraints, clarity and respondent burden when choosing an appropriate measure.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%