Effectiveness of psychoeducational interventions among caregivers of patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cheng, Qinqin; Xu, Binbin; Ng, Marques Shek Nam; Duan, Yinglong; So, Winnie K.W.

doi:10.1016/j.ijnurstu.2021.104162

Cited by 33 publications

(38 citation statements)

References 62 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…When addressing self-efficacy and coping style, special attention should be given to caregivers with higher age, females, and/or lower education, as these factors were associated with less self-efficacy and “active tackling.” Providing psychological interventions is not only important for the caregivers themselves, but also for the HNC patients, as in a prior study we found that reduced functioning of informal caregivers was associated with reduced functioning of patients related to them [ 10 ]. In a review of Cheng et al, short-term effects of psychoeducational interventions were found on caregivers’ psychological distress, quality of life, caregiver burden, and self-efficacy [ 49 ]. Future studies should focus on the long-term impact of these interventions.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-efficacy and coping style in relation to psychological distress and quality of life in informal caregivers of patients with head and neck cancer: a longitudinal study

Hof

Hoesseini

Leeuw

et al. 2023

Support Care Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective In order to understand how informal caregivers of head and neck cancer (HNC) patients deal with the consequences of the disease, we investigated their self-efficacy and coping style in relation to symptoms of anxiety and depression (distress) and quality of life (QoL) over time. In addition, factors associated with self-efficacy and coping style were investigated. Methods A total of 222 informal caregivers and their related HNC patients were prospectively followed as part from the multicenter cohort NETherlands QUality of life and Biomedical cohort studies In Cancer (NET-QUBIC). Self-efficacy and coping style were measured at baseline, and distress and QoL at baseline and 3, 6, 12, and 24 months after treatment. Results Informal caregivers had a high level of self-efficacy comparable with patients. Caregivers used “seeking social support,” “passive reacting,” and “expression of emotions” more often than patients. Factors associated with self-efficacy and coping were higher age and lower education. Higher self-efficacy was related with better QoL and “active tackling” was associated with less depression symptoms. “Passive reacting” and “expression of emotions” were associated with higher psychological distress and reduced QoL. Conclusion Among informal caregivers of HNC patients, higher self-efficacy and “active tackling” were associated with better functioning over time, while “passive reacting” and “expression of negative emotions” were associated with worse functioning. Awareness of the differences in self-efficacy skills and coping and their relationship with QoL and psychological distress will help clinicians to identify caregivers that may benefit from additional support that improve self-efficacy and “active tackling” and reduce negative coping styles.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Self-efficacy and coping style in relation to psychological distress and quality of life in informal caregivers of patients with head and neck cancer: a longitudinal study

Hof

Hoesseini

Leeuw

et al. 2023

Support Care Cancer

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…More recent systematic reviews of psychosocial interventions have also supported the beneficial effect of interventions, including PEI, in improving caregivers' quality of life (QOL) 19,20 . A recently published review by Cheng 21 focused on PEI found it was effective in reducing anxiety and depression. However, the studies were heterogeneous which made it difficult to identify intervention components for optimal designs.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…18 To date, three systematic reviews have investigated the benefits of psychosocial interventions for caregivers of patients with cancer, though have not focused on PEI specifically. 17,19,20 In a 2010 metaanalysis of 29 trials of interventions for cancer caregivers, Northouse et al 17 19,20 A recently published review by Cheng 21 focused on PEI found it was effective in reducing anxiety and depression.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The effectiveness of psychoeducational interventions on caregiver‐oriented outcomes in caregivers of adult cancer patients: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objective Cancer caregiving can result in increased psychosocial distress and poor health‐related quality of life (QOL). Psychoeducation has been shown to be effective in enhancing caregiving‐oriented outcomes. A systematic assessment of the overall effect of psychoeducational intervention (PEI) and identification of individual intervention characteristics that may contribute to the effectiveness of PEI is needed. Methods For this meta‐analysis, relevant articles were identified through electronic databases using key search terms and their medical subject heading such as “family caregiver,” “cancer,” and “psychoeducational intervention.” Results Twenty‐eight controlled trials with 3876 participants were included. PEIs had beneficial effect on depression (Standardized Mean Difference [SMD] −0.26; 95% CI = −0.50 to −0.01, p < 0.04), anxiety (SMD −0.41; 95% CI = −0.82 to 0.01, p < 0.05), caregiver burden (SMD −0.84; 95% CI = −1.22 to −0.46, p < 0.0001) and QOL (SMD 0.59, 95% CI 0.24–0.93; p < 0.0009) at the immediate post‐intervention period. At longer‐term follow‐up, the effectiveness of PEI was maintained on QOL (SMD 0.39, 95% CI = −0.00 to −0.77, p < 0.05), and anxiety (SMD −0.57; 95% CI = −1.09 to −0.06, p < 0.03). Moderation analysis showed that intervention characteristics such as studies conducted in high‐income countries, group intervention and studies that focused on specific and mixed cancers explain some of the high variations observed among the included studies. Conclusions PEI may benefit caregivers of cancer patients through the significant effects on caregiver burden, QOL, anxiety, and depression. The findings from the moderation analysis may be important for the design of future interventions.

show abstract

“…Psychosocial interventions, namely a provision of psychological and/or social support, directed at caregivers did not have clear short- or long-term changes on caregiver quality of life, physical or psychological health [ 58 ]. Psychoeducational interventions which provide an educational component about cancer, in addition to components of psychosocial interventions can result in significant improvements [ 59 ] in caregiver physical and psychological health, quality of life and burden at 3 months as well as physical quality of life specifically at up 12 months. Despite this, interventions may be difficult to implement due to limited evaluation of their acceptability, adoption and feasibility [ 60 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

What is the evidence behind cancer care reviews, a primary care cancer support tool? A scoping review

et al. 2022

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Purpose A “cancer care review” (CCR) is a conversation between a patient recently diagnosed with cancer and primary care practitioner soon after a diagnosis of cancer in the UK. This scoping review aimed to identify: methodology and validated outcome measures used to evaluate CCRs, the impact of CCRs on quality of life or symptoms, and the views of patients, their carers and healthcare professionals on CCRs. Methods A scoping review was performed and five databases (MEDLINE, Embase, PsychINFO, Scopus, Web of Science, Google Scholar) were searched systematically from January 2000 to March 2022. Results Of 4133 articles, ten met the inclusion criteria. These included surveys, qualitative research on stakeholders’ views and a small study evaluating group consultation CCRs. There were no studies on methodology to evaluate CCRs or the impact of CCRs on patient quality of life or symptoms. Some primary care professionals felt CCRs were a tick-box exercise, and that they had inadequate time to deliver care, compounded by inadequate primary-secondary care coordination and lack of expertise which was echoed by patients. Interviews with patients found few recalled CCRs and those that recalled CCRs did, did not find them particularly helpful. Partners of patients would welcome CCRs to raise personal health concerns and remain updated on patient care. Conclusions Further studies should identify the role that stakeholders believe they should have in CCRs, improve care coordination between primary care and secondary care and how to support caregivers. Implications for Cancer Survivors There is currently insufficient evidence to support the use of CCRs in general practice.

show abstract

Effectiveness of psychoeducational interventions among caregivers of patients with cancer: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Cited by 33 publications

References 62 publications

Self-efficacy and coping style in relation to psychological distress and quality of life in informal caregivers of patients with head and neck cancer: a longitudinal study

Self-efficacy and coping style in relation to psychological distress and quality of life in informal caregivers of patients with head and neck cancer: a longitudinal study

The effectiveness of psychoeducational interventions on caregiver‐oriented outcomes in caregivers of adult cancer patients: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

What is the evidence behind cancer care reviews, a primary care cancer support tool? A scoping review

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About