Stroke
Conditions
Keywords
caregiver, intervention, pilot, education, goals, skills
Brief summary
The purpose of this study was to evaluate the GETCare program, a Goal-based Education and skills Training program for Caregivers poststroke.
Detailed description
The purpose of this study was to utilize a single-arm mixed method pilot trial to evaluate the5-week GETCare program with the following study aims: (1) explore feasibility and acceptability, (2) assess knowledge acquisition and goal attainment, and (3) test preliminary effects on key caregiver outcomes. This remote program included guided goal setting, individualized resource recommendations, and education modules.
Interventions
This 5-week intervention was administered remotely and individually to caregivers utilizing phone, email, and a secure online platform. The GETCare program was mostly self-led and included five weekly module education topics: basics of stroke, caregiver skills, caregiver changes, meaningful participation, and community resources. Each module incorporated (1) individualized education, (2) goal setting, (3) skills training, and (4) community resource recommendations. The program was led by a licensed occupational therapist who is a certified stroke rehabilitation specialist. The occupational therapist conducted weekly check-ins via email or phone focused on answering questions, tracking goal progress, and assisting in problem solving.
Sponsors
Study design
Intervention model description
single-arm mixed method pilot trial
Eligibility
Inclusion criteria
* self-identification as a primary caregiver (direct care involvement) of someone who had a stroke (no restriction on stroke duration) * ≥ 18 years old * access to internet/telephone throughout the study * able to speak, read, and understand English * person with stroke expected to discharge within 1 month if still in the hospital
Exclusion criteria
* unable to read and follow basic instructions * indicated the individual with stroke had no deficits poststroke
Design outcomes
Primary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Revised Scale for Caregiving Self-efficacy | Baseline | Scores range 0-100, higher score indicates higher self-efficacy |
| Perceived Stress Scale | Baseline | Scores range 0-40, higher score indicates higher perceived stress |
Secondary
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System-43 Profile v2.1 | Baseline | 43 items across seven domains: physical function, anxiety, fatigue, depression, sleep disturbance, ability to participate in social roles and activities, and pain interference; Scores range 6-30 for each subscale. For subscales of anxiety, depression, fatigue, and sleep disturbance, higher scores indicate worse symptoms. For subscale of social participation, higher scores indicate improved symptoms. Subscales of physical function and pain interference were not included in analyses, since they were not expected to change through this intervention. |
| Neuro-Quality of Life (Neuro-QOL) Positive Affect and Well-being v1.0 | Baseline | 9 items; Scores range 9-45, higher score indicates higher positive affect and well-being |
| Knowledge assessment | Baseline | Evaluate knowledge acquisition of weekly education topics; Scores range 0-35, higher score indicates higher knowledge |
| Canadian Occupational Performance Measure | Baseline | Assesses importance of goal, current performance of goal, and satisfaction with current performance of goal; Scores range 0-10, higher score indicates higher importance, performance, and satisfaction with performance |
| Neuro-Quality of Life (Neuro-QOL) Positive Affect and Well-being | Post-intervention (approximately 6 weeks) | 9 items; Scores range 9-45, higher score indicates higher positive affect and well-being |
| Modified Caregiver Strain Index | Baseline | Scores range 0-26, higher score indicates higher caregiver strain |
Other
| Measure | Time frame | Description |
|---|---|---|
| Feedback survey | Post-intervention (approximately 6 weeks) | Included a variety of questions (no/yes, Likert scales, and open-ended questions) regarding feedback of the intervention. For example, Please indicate how helpful the additional handouts and videos were for you (0 = not at all helpful, 1 = a little helpful, 2 = somewhat helpful, 3 = quite helpful, 4 = extremely helpful). |
Countries
United States