A systematic review of remotely delivered interventions to support wellbeing amongst caregivers of adults with acquired brain injuries.

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY Brain Impairment Pub Date : 2024-05-01 DOI:10.1071/IB23099
Nils Rickardsson, Daniel Jon Stopforth, David Gillanders
{"title":"A systematic review of remotely delivered interventions to support wellbeing amongst caregivers of adults with acquired brain injuries.","authors":"Nils Rickardsson, Daniel Jon Stopforth, David Gillanders","doi":"10.1071/IB23099","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Background There is a need for improved access to evidence-based interventions supporting the wellbeing of caregivers of adults with acquired brain injury (ABI). Remotely delivered interventions could address this need. The present systematic review sought to collate studies evaluating remotely delivered interventions designed to improve the wellbeing of caregivers of adults with an ABI, to summarise findings and to comment on the quality of this research. Methods Systematic searches were conducted up until December 2023. Study characteristics, populations, interventions and outcomes were outlined, and papers were appraised on methodological quality. The review was pre-registered (PROSPERO: CRD42020189235). Results Eleven studies meeting inclusion criteria were identified. Methodological quality was generally low to adequate. Most studies evaluated an intervention for caregivers of people with stroke, with a variety of types of interventions trialled. The majority of studies reported non-significant findings on wellbeing outcomes when compared to control conditions. Conclusions There is limited evidence supporting a remotely delivered intervention to improve wellbeing outcomes for ABI caregivers. Specific recommendations are provided, including the development of a core set of outcomes and replication of findings over time, which can improve research into the development and evaluation of remote interventions for this population.</p>","PeriodicalId":56329,"journal":{"name":"Brain Impairment","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brain Impairment","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1071/IB23099","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background There is a need for improved access to evidence-based interventions supporting the wellbeing of caregivers of adults with acquired brain injury (ABI). Remotely delivered interventions could address this need. The present systematic review sought to collate studies evaluating remotely delivered interventions designed to improve the wellbeing of caregivers of adults with an ABI, to summarise findings and to comment on the quality of this research. Methods Systematic searches were conducted up until December 2023. Study characteristics, populations, interventions and outcomes were outlined, and papers were appraised on methodological quality. The review was pre-registered (PROSPERO: CRD42020189235). Results Eleven studies meeting inclusion criteria were identified. Methodological quality was generally low to adequate. Most studies evaluated an intervention for caregivers of people with stroke, with a variety of types of interventions trialled. The majority of studies reported non-significant findings on wellbeing outcomes when compared to control conditions. Conclusions There is limited evidence supporting a remotely delivered intervention to improve wellbeing outcomes for ABI caregivers. Specific recommendations are provided, including the development of a core set of outcomes and replication of findings over time, which can improve research into the development and evaluation of remote interventions for this population.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对支持后天性脑损伤成人护理人员健康的远程干预措施进行系统性审查。
背景 有必要改善循证干预措施的获取途径,以支持后天性脑损伤(ABI)成人护理者的福祉。远程干预可以满足这一需求。本系统性综述旨在整理评估旨在改善后天性脑损伤成人护理者福祉的远程干预措施的研究,总结研究结果并对研究质量进行评论。方法 在 2023 年 12 月之前进行系统检索。对研究特点、研究人群、干预措施和结果进行了概述,并对论文的方法学质量进行了评估。综述进行了预先登记(PROSPERO:CRD42020189235)。结果 确定了 11 项符合纳入标准的研究。研究方法的质量从一般较低到足够高。大多数研究评估了针对脑卒中患者照护者的干预措施,并试用了多种类型的干预措施。与对照组相比,大多数研究报告的幸福感结果并不显著。结论 支持远程干预以改善 ABI 照护者幸福感的证据有限。本文提出了一些具体建议,包括制定一套核心结果和长期复制研究结果,这些建议可以改进针对该人群的远程干预措施的开发和评估研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Brain Impairment
Brain Impairment CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-NEUROSCIENCES
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
30
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: The journal addresses topics related to the aetiology, epidemiology, treatment and outcomes of brain impairment with a particular focus on the implications for functional status, participation, rehabilitation and quality of life. Disciplines reflect a broad multidisciplinary scope and include neuroscience, neurology, neuropsychology, psychiatry, clinical psychology, occupational therapy, physiotherapy, speech pathology, social work, and nursing. Submissions are welcome across the full range of conditions that affect brain function (stroke, tumour, progressive neurological illnesses, dementia, traumatic brain injury, epilepsy, etc.) throughout the lifespan.
期刊最新文献
Health literacy after traumatic brain injury: characterisation and control comparison. The development of a cognitive screening protocol for Aboriginal and/or Torres Strait Islander peoples: the Guddi Way screen. The effect of cranioplasty on outcomes and complications of unresponsive wakefulness syndrome and minimally responsive state. Spanish translation and cross-cultural adaptation of the Box and Block Test: a pilot study in adults with chronic acquired brain injury. Using the Knowledge to Action framework to improve housing and support for people with Multiple Sclerosis.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1