This meta-review clarified variations in review methodology and identified a few potent groups of intervention (most notably psychoeducation, psychotherapy, occupational therapy, and multicomponent interventions), although no intervention type had broad effects on caregiver outcomes. Methodological issues in the existing reviews (e.g., selective use of studies to serve different research purposes and inconsistent classification of interventions) were noted and taken into account when interpreting findings.
The evidence also does not support multicomponent interventions to have broader impacts than single-component programs. There was no evidence that dyadic programs were better than caregiver-only programs, or that programs delivered individually or in groups would differ in their impacts.
Support groups and respite were generally ineffective. Null or weak results were found for anxiety, social support and burden. Evidence of intervention effect was also found for quality of life (psychoeducation), mastery (psychoeducation, occupational therapy and multicomponent interventions) and communication skills (communication training). Depression was most modifiable, with effects found across a spectrum of interventions (psychoeducation, counseling/psychotherapy, occupational therapy, mindfulness-based interventions, multicomponent interventions, etc.). The great majority of studies were of low quality according to AMSTAR II, but quality factors appeared unrelated to the conclusions obtained. Sixty reviews covering > 500 intervention studies were selected and appraised with Assessment of Multiple Systematic Reviews (AMSTAR) II. MEDLINE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Cochrane Library were searched to identify reviews published during 2006–2018.
A meta-review was conducted to synthesize the findings of systematic reviews and meta-analyses. Many reviews with conflicting findings on dementia caregiver interventions have been published.
0 kommentar(er)
