Download
slide1 n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Gillian Parker Hilary Arksey Melissa Harden PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Gillian Parker Hilary Arksey Melissa Harden

Gillian Parker Hilary Arksey Melissa Harden

184 Vues Download Presentation
Télécharger la présentation

Gillian Parker Hilary Arksey Melissa Harden

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. International evidence on effective interventions to support carers: Are we looking for the right outcomes Gillian Parker Hilary Arksey Melissa Harden

  2. Outline • Background to the review • Methods • Findings • Raising questions about appropriate outcomes to use in evaluation research

  3. Background • National Strategy 2008 • DH and Standing Commission on Carers • Understanding of what we know about what are effective interventions to support carers • Commissioned to carry out a meta-review (review of reviews) to address this issue • NOT about ‘normal’ services

  4. Methods for conducting meta-review • Followed a defined search strategy • Screened over 11,000 references • Appraised nearly 300 articles and reports for relevance and quality • Scope of the field based on 34 reviews (20 higher quality; 14 lower quality) • Detailed analysis for meta-review based on 20 higher quality reviews

  5. Findings 1: Scope of field (higher and lower quality systematic reviews) Types of interventions reviewed: • Psychosocial, psycho-educational psychological • Respite care • Information, education, knowledge, communication • Health service interventions • Diverse mix

  6. Scope of field (cont’d …) Target carer groups: • Carers of people with dementia/older people • Carers of: stroke survivors; people with kidney disease; heart patients; palliative and cancer carers; bipolar patients; people with COPD • Carers in general

  7. Scope of field (cont’d …) Types of outcomes measured: • Carer burden, strain or stress • Psychological or mental health • Subjective well-being or QoL • Knowledge or caring ‘competence’ • Physical health • Satisfaction • Costs

  8. Scope of field (cont’d …) Number of primary studies included in reviews • Ranged from 0 to over 150 • Overlap of primary studies International coverage • Majority of primary studies in systematic reviews from USA, followed by UK

  9. Findings 2: Qualitative findings from higher quality systematic reviews

  10. Findings 3: Quantitative findings from higher quality reviews

  11. Why is there so little evidence of effectiveness? • Quality of the primary studies – small, poorly conducted, inadequate ‘control’ • Short-term follow-up • Difficulties of doing this sort of research • Gaps in groups covered: other than dementia, BME groups, rural carers, other relationships • Are we looking at the right outcomes?

  12. How can we make intervention research better? • Lack of theory in designing interventions • Need ‘proof of principle’ work • Need efficacy trials before effectiveness trials • Need costs to be included • Finding better outcomes to include in studies • Is ‘carer intervention’ the right way forward, given what we know about the importance of ‘services’?

  13. Contact details Gillian Parker: gillian.parker@york.ac.uk Social Policy Research Unit University of York York YO10 5DD SPRU website address http://www.york.ac.uk/inst/spru/