并发服务如何模糊干预益处的检测:第2部分:对虚弱老年人和家庭照顾者的PREP试验的二次分析。

IF 1.1 4区 医学 Q3 NURSING Research in Gerontological Nursing Pub Date : 2023-03-01 DOI:10.3928/19404921-20230220-03
Barbara J Stewart, Karen S Lyons, Mark C Hornbrook, Shirin O Hiatt, Maureen O'Keeffe-Rosetti, Jonathan Fields, Patricia G Archbold
{"title":"并发服务如何模糊干预益处的检测:第2部分:对虚弱老年人和家庭照顾者的PREP试验的二次分析。","authors":"Barbara J Stewart,&nbsp;Karen S Lyons,&nbsp;Mark C Hornbrook,&nbsp;Shirin O Hiatt,&nbsp;Maureen O'Keeffe-Rosetti,&nbsp;Jonathan Fields,&nbsp;Patricia G Archbold","doi":"10.3928/19404921-20230220-03","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Family caregivers frequently use health and social services to support their caregiving. In evaluating care-giving interventions, however, researchers rarely examine the influences of such concurrent services on intervention effectiveness. In this Part 2 secondary analysis of data from the Oregon Health & Science University/Kaiser Permanente Northwest Region Family Care Study, we examined the moderating influences of concurrent services on intervention effectiveness. The Family Care Study was a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the preparedness, skill, enrichment, and predictability (PREP) intervention with caregivers of frail older adults referred for skilled home health. Compared with control caregivers receiving usual home health care (n = 103), PREP intervention caregivers (n = 104) reported greater improvements in family care (effect size, d = 0.58). We conducted follow-up analyses to determine whether PREP was differentially effective depending on whether dyads received concurrent Social Health Maintenance Organization (SHMO) services, concurrent hospice services, or neither. In the 55% of dyads not receiving SHMO or hospice, we found that PREP's effects were large compared to usual care (d = 1.16, p < 0.001). PREP's effects were not significant for dyads receiving concurrent SHMO or hospice services. Results highlight the strong benefits of hospice for control dyads, but reveal difficulties in evaluating intervention effectiveness when dyads receive concurrent services. [Research in Gerontological Nursing, 16(2), 71-83.].","PeriodicalId":51272,"journal":{"name":"Research in Gerontological Nursing","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":1.1000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How Concurrent Services Obscured Detection of Intervention Benefits: Part 2: Secondary Analysis of the PREP Trial for Frail Older Adults and Family Caregivers.\",\"authors\":\"Barbara J Stewart,&nbsp;Karen S Lyons,&nbsp;Mark C Hornbrook,&nbsp;Shirin O Hiatt,&nbsp;Maureen O'Keeffe-Rosetti,&nbsp;Jonathan Fields,&nbsp;Patricia G Archbold\",\"doi\":\"10.3928/19404921-20230220-03\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Family caregivers frequently use health and social services to support their caregiving. In evaluating care-giving interventions, however, researchers rarely examine the influences of such concurrent services on intervention effectiveness. In this Part 2 secondary analysis of data from the Oregon Health & Science University/Kaiser Permanente Northwest Region Family Care Study, we examined the moderating influences of concurrent services on intervention effectiveness. The Family Care Study was a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the preparedness, skill, enrichment, and predictability (PREP) intervention with caregivers of frail older adults referred for skilled home health. Compared with control caregivers receiving usual home health care (n = 103), PREP intervention caregivers (n = 104) reported greater improvements in family care (effect size, d = 0.58). We conducted follow-up analyses to determine whether PREP was differentially effective depending on whether dyads received concurrent Social Health Maintenance Organization (SHMO) services, concurrent hospice services, or neither. In the 55% of dyads not receiving SHMO or hospice, we found that PREP's effects were large compared to usual care (d = 1.16, p < 0.001). PREP's effects were not significant for dyads receiving concurrent SHMO or hospice services. Results highlight the strong benefits of hospice for control dyads, but reveal difficulties in evaluating intervention effectiveness when dyads receive concurrent services. [Research in Gerontological Nursing, 16(2), 71-83.].\",\"PeriodicalId\":51272,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Research in Gerontological Nursing\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.1000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"2\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Research in Gerontological Nursing\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.3928/19404921-20230220-03\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Research in Gerontological Nursing","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3928/19404921-20230220-03","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

摘要

家庭照护者经常使用保健和社会服务来支持其照护工作。然而,在评估护理干预措施时,研究人员很少检查这些并发服务对干预效果的影响。在第二部分对俄勒冈健康与科学大学/凯撒医疗机构西北地区家庭护理研究数据的二次分析中,我们检验了并行服务对干预效果的调节作用。家庭护理研究是一项随机对照试验,以评估准备、技能、丰富和可预测性(PREP)干预对虚弱老年人的照顾者转介熟练的家庭健康。与接受常规家庭保健的对照组护理人员(n = 103)相比,PREP干预护理人员(n = 104)报告家庭护理的改善更大(效应量,d = 0.58)。我们进行了随访分析,以确定PREP是否有不同的效果,取决于是否同时接受社会健康维护组织(SHMO)服务,同时接受临终关怀服务,或两者都不接受。在55%未接受SHMO或临终关怀的患者中,我们发现PREP的效果比常规护理更大(d = 1.16, p < 0.001)。PREP对同时接受SHMO或临终关怀服务的二人组效果不显著。结果强调安宁疗护对对照双性恋者的好处,但当双性恋者同时接受服务时,难以评估干预效果。老年护理研究,16(2),71-83。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
How Concurrent Services Obscured Detection of Intervention Benefits: Part 2: Secondary Analysis of the PREP Trial for Frail Older Adults and Family Caregivers.
Family caregivers frequently use health and social services to support their caregiving. In evaluating care-giving interventions, however, researchers rarely examine the influences of such concurrent services on intervention effectiveness. In this Part 2 secondary analysis of data from the Oregon Health & Science University/Kaiser Permanente Northwest Region Family Care Study, we examined the moderating influences of concurrent services on intervention effectiveness. The Family Care Study was a randomized controlled trial to evaluate the preparedness, skill, enrichment, and predictability (PREP) intervention with caregivers of frail older adults referred for skilled home health. Compared with control caregivers receiving usual home health care (n = 103), PREP intervention caregivers (n = 104) reported greater improvements in family care (effect size, d = 0.58). We conducted follow-up analyses to determine whether PREP was differentially effective depending on whether dyads received concurrent Social Health Maintenance Organization (SHMO) services, concurrent hospice services, or neither. In the 55% of dyads not receiving SHMO or hospice, we found that PREP's effects were large compared to usual care (d = 1.16, p < 0.001). PREP's effects were not significant for dyads receiving concurrent SHMO or hospice services. Results highlight the strong benefits of hospice for control dyads, but reveal difficulties in evaluating intervention effectiveness when dyads receive concurrent services. [Research in Gerontological Nursing, 16(2), 71-83.].
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
2.30
自引率
6.20%
发文量
44
审稿时长
>12 weeks
期刊介绍: Research in Gerontological Nursing is a forum for disseminating peer-reviewed, interdisciplinary, cutting-edge gerontological nursing research and theory to investigators, educators, academicians, clinicians, and policymakers involved with older adults in all health care settings. The Journal accepts manuscripts reporting research, theory, integrative and systematic reviews, instrument development, and research methods with the aims of improving the wellness and quality of care of the older adult population. Theory papers should advance gerontological knowledge, and integrative reviews should provide an analysis of the state of the science and provide direction for future research.
期刊最新文献
Assessment of Risk Factors for Falls in Hospitalized Older Adults: A Meta-Analysis. Erratum for "Factors Contributing to Well-Being in Japanese Community-Dwelling Older Adults Who Experienced Spousal Bereavement". Feasibility of a Culture-Based Multicomponent Cognitive Training Program for Older Adults With Dementia. Hospital at Home: An Example of Research Needed to Shape Policy. Mechanisms Underlying the Use of Abusive and Neglectful Behaviors in Dementia Caregiving: The Role of Caregiver Mental Health.
×
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