|
DSpace at RU >
University Library >
Academic bibliography >
Files in This Item:
| File |
Description |
Size | Format |
| publisher's version | 83.39 kB | Adobe PDF | Under Embargo
until further notice
|
|
| Title: | The effect on caregiver burden of a problem-based home visiting programme for frail older people |
| Author(s): | Melis, R.J.F. (306071177) Eijken, M.I.J. van (298977044) Achterberg, T. van (124310338) Teerenstra, S. (263474879) Vernooij-Dassen, M.J.F.J. (070385319) Lisdonk, E.H. van de (071283587) Olde Rikkert, M.G.M. (167212737) |
| Publication year: | 2009 |
| Document type: | Article / Letter to editor |
| Journal: | Age and Ageing |
| ISSN: | 0002-0729 |
| Volume: | vol. 38 |
| Issue: | iss. 5 |
| Start page: | p. 542 |
| End page: | p. 547 |
| Abstract: | OBJECTIVE: caregiver effects of geriatric care models focusing primarily at the patient have not been consistently studied. We studied caregiver effects of a nurse-led comprehensive geriatric evaluation and management (GEM) programme for community-dwelling frail older people that showed-in a randomised comparison with usual care--health-related quality of life benefits for the care receivers. METHODS: this randomised trial included 110 caregiver/patient dyads who were followed up for 6 months. Primary analyses were intention-to-treat analyses of caregiver burden assessed with Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI; 0-88; higher means more burden). Preplanned subgroup analyses were conducted for cognition, living arrangement and patient/caregiver co-residence. RESULTS: overall, perceived caregiver burden showed no significant differences between study groups in changes over time. However, perceived burden was at baseline more than eight points higher in caregivers sharing a household with patients (n = 23) compared to caregivers living separately (n = 87). The intervention performed better in caregivers living together with the patient than in caregivers living separately (P for interaction = 0.04). Co-resident caregivers experienced six-Zarit point improvement compared with four-point deterioration in the non-co-resident caregivers. CONCLUSIONS: GEM at home benefited patients, but maybe not caregivers. Caregiver effects are related to whether caregivers live with the patient or not. |
| Subject: | DCN 1: Perception and Action NCEBP 11: Alzheimer Centre NCEBP 2: Evaluation of complex medical interventions NCEBP 6: Quality of nursing and allied health care NCEBP 7: Effective primary care and public health |
| Subject: | NCEBP 6: Quality of nursing and allied health care |
| Organization: | Geriatrics IQ Healthcare Epidemiology, Biostatistics & HTA Primary Healthcare |
| Organization (former): | Centre for Quality of Care Research
|
| Appears in Collections: | Academic bibliography
|
|
Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
http://hdl.handle.net/2066/81269
Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.
|
|