A pilot randomized clinical trial of a teamwork intervention for heart failure care dyads.
Behavioral intervention
Dyadic research
Family caregivers
Heart failure
Journal
Heart & lung : the journal of critical care
ISSN: 1527-3288
Titre abrégé: Heart Lung
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 0330057
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
Historique:
received:
22
01
2021
revised:
24
06
2021
accepted:
26
07
2021
pubmed:
19
8
2021
medline:
15
12
2021
entrez:
18
8
2021
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
Dyadic heart failure (HF) management can improve outcomes for patients and caregivers and can be enhanced through eHealth interventions. To evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of an eHealth dyadic teamwork intervention, compared to an attention control condition. We recruited 29 HF patient-caregiver dyads from inpatient units and randomized dyads to an intervention or a control group. We calculated enrollment and retention rates, described acceptability using interview and questionnaire data, and computed intervention effect sizes. 37% of eligible dyads agreed to participate and 93% of randomized participants completed follow-up questionnaires. Participants found both study conditions to be acceptable. Between-group effect sizes suggested that the intervention led to improvements in relationship quality, self-efficacy, and quality of life for patients and caregivers. Dyadic recruitment from acute care settings is challenging. Findings provide initial evidence that our intervention can contribute to better health outcomes for HF dyads.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Dyadic heart failure (HF) management can improve outcomes for patients and caregivers and can be enhanced through eHealth interventions.
OBJECTIVE
To evaluate the feasibility, acceptability, and preliminary efficacy of an eHealth dyadic teamwork intervention, compared to an attention control condition.
METHODS
We recruited 29 HF patient-caregiver dyads from inpatient units and randomized dyads to an intervention or a control group. We calculated enrollment and retention rates, described acceptability using interview and questionnaire data, and computed intervention effect sizes.
RESULTS
37% of eligible dyads agreed to participate and 93% of randomized participants completed follow-up questionnaires. Participants found both study conditions to be acceptable. Between-group effect sizes suggested that the intervention led to improvements in relationship quality, self-efficacy, and quality of life for patients and caregivers.
CONCLUSIONS
Dyadic recruitment from acute care settings is challenging. Findings provide initial evidence that our intervention can contribute to better health outcomes for HF dyads.
Identifiants
pubmed: 34407481
pii: S0147-9563(21)00227-2
doi: 10.1016/j.hrtlng.2021.07.008
pmc: PMC8542590
mid: NIHMS1733465
pii:
doi:
Types de publication
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
877-884Subventions
Organisme : NINR NIH HHS
ID : T32 NR015433
Pays : United States
Informations de copyright
Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.
Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
Declaration of Competing Interest None.
Références
Nurs Inq. 2014 Jun;21(2):140-52
pubmed: 23617406
J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2013 Mar-Apr;28(2):129-36
pubmed: 22343213
Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2017 Oct;16(7):595-604
pubmed: 28895484
Psychol Rev. 1977 Mar;84(2):191-215
pubmed: 847061
Res Nurs Health. 2015 Oct;38(5):392-402
pubmed: 26355702
J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2010 Mar-Apr;25(2):142-8
pubmed: 20168194
J Chronic Dis. 1987;40(5):373-83
pubmed: 3558716
J Telemed Telecare. 2013 Jul;19(5):260-5
pubmed: 24163235
Cancer Nurs. 2014 Sep-Oct;37(5):321-30
pubmed: 24945270
Qual Life Res. 2017 Feb;26(2):367-379
pubmed: 27631892
Am J Crit Care. 2016 Sep;25(5):418-21
pubmed: 27587421
Oncol Nurs Forum. 2015 Mar;42(2):183-92
pubmed: 25806885
Cancer. 2012 Jan 15;118(2):500-9
pubmed: 21953578
J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2016 May-Jun;31(3):226-35
pubmed: 25774844
Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2009 Jun;8(2):97-104
pubmed: 18706865
West J Nurs Res. 2020 Nov;42(11):974-992
pubmed: 31941418
J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2016 May-Jun;31(3):E10-22
pubmed: 26544175
Qual Life Res. 2009 Sep;18(7):873-80
pubmed: 19543809
J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2010 Sep-Oct;25(5):411-9
pubmed: 20714239
Clin Nurs Res. 2015 Aug;24(4):388-400
pubmed: 24599063
J Fam Nurs. 2018 Feb;24(1):8-28
pubmed: 29353528
Am J Crit Care. 2011 Mar;20(2):146-52
pubmed: 20378777
J Nurs Meas. 2008;16(1):43-60
pubmed: 18578109
Int J Nurs Stud. 2018 Jan;77:232-242
pubmed: 29128777
Gerontologist. 2018 Jul 13;58(4):635-643
pubmed: 28449107
Am J Prev Med. 2009 May;36(5):452-7
pubmed: 19362699
Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2018 Feb;17(2):102-113
pubmed: 28868917
Res Nurs Health. 1990 Dec;13(6):375-84
pubmed: 2270302
Appl Nurs Res. 2016 Nov;32:156-163
pubmed: 27969021
Res Nurs Health. 2014 Dec;37(6):524-37
pubmed: 25324013
Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2015 Feb;14(1):79-89
pubmed: 24399843
Int J Nurs Stud. 2015 Feb;52(2):588-97
pubmed: 25468283
Circulation. 2020 Jun 2;141(22):e864-e878
pubmed: 32349542
Circulation. 2020 Mar 3;141(9):e139-e596
pubmed: 31992061
Curr Opin Support Palliat Care. 2015 Mar;9(1):26-30
pubmed: 25588208
J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2013 Sep-Oct;28(5):417-28
pubmed: 22760173
J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2009 Nov-Dec;24(6):485-97
pubmed: 19786884
Res Nurs Health. 2007 Feb;30(1):84-98
pubmed: 17243110
Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2020 Oct 07;20(3):268–275
pubmed: 33611366
J Affect Disord. 2009 Apr;114(1-3):163-73
pubmed: 18752852
J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2015 Jul-Aug;30(4 Suppl 1):S52-63
pubmed: 25955196
J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2019 Mar/Apr;34(2):159-165
pubmed: 30475246
J Adv Nurs. 2005 Oct;52(2):170-9
pubmed: 16164478
Comput Inform Nurs. 2018 Feb;36(2):90-97
pubmed: 28901967
J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2013 May-Jun;28(3):245-55
pubmed: 22760172
Psychooncology. 2017 Jul;26(7):1027-1035
pubmed: 28691761
Circulation. 2009 Sep 22;120(12):1141-63
pubmed: 19720935