Effectiveness of caregiver interventions for people with cancer and non-cancer-related chronic pain: a systematic review and meta-analysis

Author:

Smith Toby O.12ORCID,Pearson Matthew3,Smith Matthew J4,Fletcher Jessica1,Irving Lisa5,Lister Sarah6

Affiliation:

1. Nuffield Department of Orthopaedics, Rheumatology and Musculoskeletal Sciences, University of Oxford, Oxford, UK

2. School of Health Sciences, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

3. Dynamic Health, Cambridgeshire Community Services, Huntingdon, UK

4. The Library, University of East Anglia, Norwich, UK

5. Physiotherapy Department, Sunderland Royal Hospital, South Tyneside and Sunderland NHS Foundation Trust, Sunderland, UK

6. Physiotherapy Department, Norfolk and Norwich University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Norwich, UK

Abstract

Background: People with chronic pain frequently have difficulties in completing everyday tasks to maintain independence and quality of life. Informal caregivers may provide support to these individuals. However, the effectiveness of interventions to train and support these individuals in caregiving remains unclear. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the evidence to determine the effectiveness of caregiver interventions to support informal caregivers of people with chronic pain. Methods: A systematic review of published and unpublished literature databases was undertaken (9 April 2021). Trials reporting clinical outcomes of caregiver interventions to train informal caregivers to support community-dwelling people with chronic pain were included. Meta-analysis was undertaken and each outcome was assessed using Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation. Results: Twenty-seven studies were eligible (N = 3427 patients). Twenty-four studies assessed patients with cancer pain and three with musculoskeletal pain. No other patient groups were identified. There was very low-quality evidence that caregiver interventions were beneficial for caregiver health-related quality of life (standardised mean difference = 0.26, 95% confidence interval = 0.01 to 0.52; N = 231). There was moderate-quality evidence that caregiving interventions were effective in reducing pain in the short-term (standardised mean difference = 0.16, 95% confidence interval = −0.29 to −0.03). There was low-quality evidence that caregiving interventions had no beneficial effect over usual care for psychological outcomes, fatigue, coping or physical function in the long-term. Conclusion: Caregiving interventions may be effective for patients and caregivers but only in the shorter-term and for a limited number of outcomes. There is insufficient evidence examining the effectiveness of caregiver interventions for people with non-cancer-related pain.

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cited by 3 articles. 订阅此论文施引文献 订阅此论文施引文献,注册后可以免费订阅5篇论文的施引文献,订阅后可以查看论文全部施引文献

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3