Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Home

The effects of a multi-component dyadic intervention on the psychological distress of family caregivers providing care to people with dementia: a randomized controlled trial

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  25 May 2015

Anna-Eva Prick
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Psychology and the EMGO institute for Health and Care Research, Faculty of Psychology and Education, VU University, Van der Boechorststraat 1, 1081 BT Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Jacomine de Lange
Affiliation:
Research Centre Innovations in Care, Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences, Rochussenstraat 198, 3015 EK Rotterdam, the Netherlands
Jos Twisk
Affiliation:
Department of Epidemiology and Biostatistics and the EMGO Institute for Health and Care Research, VU University Medical Centre, De Boelelaan 1118, 1081 HV Amsterdam, the Netherlands
Anne Margriet Pot
Affiliation:
Department of Clinical Psychology and the EMGO institute for Health and Care Research, Faculty of Psychology and Education, VU University, Van der Boechorststraat 1, 1081 BT Amsterdam, the Netherlands Program on Ageing, Institute on Mental Health and Addiction, Da Costakade 45, 3500 AS Utrecht, the Netherlands School of Psychology, University of Queensland, St Lucia QLD 4072, Australia
Corresponding
E-mail address:

Abstract

Background:

Earlier research showed that multi-component dyadic interventions – including a combination of intervention strategies and addressing both the person with dementia and caregiver – have a beneficial impact on the mental and physical health of people with dementia and their family caregivers. A randomized controlled trial (RCT) of a multi-component dyadic intervention, which is a translated and adapted version of an intervention that has been shown to be effective in the US by Teri et al. (2003), was performed. The effects on caregivers’ mood (primary outcome), burden, general health, and salivary cortisol levels (secondary outcomes) were studied.

Methods:

Community-dwelling people with dementia and their family caregivers (N = 111 dyads) were randomly assigned. The experimental group received eight home visits during three months, combining physical exercise and support (psycho-education, communication skills training, and planning of pleasant activities). Both the physical exercise and support component were directed at both the person with dementia and the caregiver. The comparison group received monthly information bulletins and phone calls. There were three measurements at baseline (prior to the intervention), at three months, and at six months into the intervention. Data were analyzed with Generalized Estimating Equations (GEE) based on an intention-to-treat analysis of all available data.

Results:

All analyses showed no benefits of the intervention over time on any of the outcomes.

Conclusion:

The negative results might be explained by the translation and adaptation of the intervention that has been shown to be effective in the US: the intervention was shortened and did not include cognitive reframing. However, only the health effects on people with dementia and not on caregivers were studied in the US. Several other factors might also have played a role, which are important for future studies to take into account. These are: the usual health care in the country or region of implementation; the wishes and needs of participants for specific intervention components; the room for improvement regarding these components; the inclusion of positive outcome measures, such as pleasure, and the quality of the relationship.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © International Psychogeriatric Association 2015 

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below.

References

Acton, G. J. and Kang, J. (2001). Interventions to reduce the burden of caregiving for an adult with dementia: a meta-analysis. Research in Nursing and Health, 24, 349360.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Armijo-Olivo, S., Warren, S. and Magee, D. (2009). Intention to treat analysis, compliance, drop-outs and how to deal with missing data in clinical research: a review. Physical Therapy Reviews, 14, 36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ayalon, L., Gum, A. M., Feliciano, L. and Areán, P. A. (2006). Effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for the management of neuropsychiatric symptoms in patients with dementia: a systematic review. Archives of Internal Medicine, 166, 2182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Bell, C. M., Araki, S. S. and Neumann, P. J. (2001). The association between caregiver burden and caregiver health-related quality of life in Alzheimer disease. Alzheimer Disease and Associated Disorders, 15, 129136.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bell, M. L., Kenward, M. G., Fairclough, D. L. and Horton, N. J. (2013). Differential dropout and bias in randomised controlled trials: when it matters and when it may not. BMJ, 346:e8668.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Black, W. and Almeida, O. P. (2004). A systematic review of the association between the behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia and burden of care. International Psychogeriatrics, 16, 295315.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Bouma, J., Ranchor, A. V., Sanderman, R. and Van Sonderen, E. (1995). CES-D. Groningen: Noordelijk Centrum Voor Gezondheidsvraagstukken.Google Scholar
Brodaty, H. and Arasaratnam, C. (2012). Meta-analysis of non-pharmacological interventions for neuropsychiatric symptoms of dementia. American Journal of Psychiatry, 169, 946953.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brodaty, H., Green, A. and Koschera, A. (2003). Meta-analysis of psychosocial interventions for caregivers of people with dementia. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 51, 657664.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Clyburn, L. D., Stones, M. J., Hadjistavropoulos, T. and Tuokko, H. (2000). Predicting caregiver burden and depression in Alzheimer's disease. Journals of Gerontology Series B, 55, S2S13.Google ScholarPubMed
Connell, C. M., Janevic, M. R. and Gallant, M. P. (2001). The costs of caring: impact of dementia on family caregivers. Journal of Geriatric Psychiatry and Neurology, 14, 179187.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Cooke, D., Mcnally, L., Mulligan, K., Harrison, M. and Newman, S. P. (2001). Psychosocial interventions for caregivers of people with dementia: a systematic review. Aging and Mental Health, 5, 120135.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Cuijpers, P. (2005). Depressive disorders in caregivers of dementia patients: a systematic review. Aging and Mental Health, 9, 325330.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Etters, L., Goodall, D. and Harrison, B. E. (2008). Caregiver burden among dementia patient caregivers: a review of the literature. Journal of the American Academy of Nurse Practitioners, 20, 423428.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Folstein, M. F., Folstein, S. E. and Mchugh, P. R. (1975). “Mini-mental state:” a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. Journal of Psychiatric Research, 12, 189198.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Gitlin, L. N. et al. (2003). Effect of multicomponent interventions on caregiver burden and depression: the REACH multisite initiative at 6-month follow-up. Psychology and Aging, 18, 361.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Harris, T. J., Victor, C. R., Carey, I. M., Adams, R. and Cook, D. G. (2008). Less healthy, but more active: opposing selection biases when recruiting older people to a physical activity study through primary care. BMC Public Health, 8, 182.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kirschbaum, C. and Hellhammer, D. H. (1994). Salivary cortisol in psychoneuroendocrine research: recent developments and applications. Psychoneuroendocrinology, 19, 313333.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Kok, R. and Verhey, F. (2002). Dutch translation of the mini mental state examination (Folstein et al., 1975).Google Scholar
Larue, A., Bank, L., Jarvik, L. and Hetland, M. (1979). Health in old age: how do physicians’ ratings and self-ratings compare? Journal of Gerontology, 34, 687691.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Logsdon, R. G., Mccurry, S. M. and Teri, L. (2005). A home healthcare approach to exercise for persons with Alzheimer's disease. Care Management Journals, 6, 9097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Moniz-Cook, E. et al. (2008). A European consensus on outcome measures for psychosocial intervention research in dementia care. Aging and Mental Health, 12, 1429.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Moon, H. and Adams, K. B. (2013). The effectiveness of dyadic interventions for people with dementia and their caregivers. Dementia, 12, 821839.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Olazarán, J. et al. (2010). Nonpharmacological therapies in Alzheimer's disease: a systematic review of efficacy. Dementia and Geriatric Cognitive Disorders, 30, 161178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Parker, D., Mills, S. and Abbey, J. (2008). Effectiveness of interventions that assist caregivers to support people with dementia living in the community: a systematic review. International Journal of Evidence-Based Healthcare, 6, 137172.Google ScholarPubMed
Pinquart, M. and Sörensen, S. (2003). Differences between caregivers and non-caregivers in psychological health and physical health: a meta-analysis. Psychology and aging, 18, 250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pot, A., Deeg, D. and Van Dyck, R. (1997). Psychological well-being of informal caregivers of elderly people with dementia: changes over time. Aging and mental health, 1, 261268.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pot, A., Deeg, D., Van Dyck, R. and Jonker, C. (1998). Psychological distress of caregivers: the mediator effect of caregiving appraisal. Patient Education and Counseling, 34, 4351.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Pot, A., Van Dyck, R. and Deeg, D. (1995). Perceived stress caused by informal caregiving. Construction of a scale. Tijdschrift voor Gerontologie en Geriatrie, 26, 214.Google ScholarPubMed
Prick, A. E., De Lange, J., Scherder, E. and Pot, A. M. (2011). Home-based exercise and support programme for people with dementia and their caregivers: study protocol of a randomised controlled trial. BMC Public Health, 11, 894.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Prick, A. E., De Lange, J., Vant Leven, N. and Pot, A. M. (2014). Process evaluation of a multicomponent dyadic intervention study with exercise and support for people with dementia and their family caregivers. Trials, 15, 401.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Prince, M. and Jackson, J. (2009). World Alzheimer Report 2009, Alzheimer's Disease International.Google Scholar
Radloff, L. S. (1977). The CES-D scale A self-report depression scale for research in the general population. Applied Psychological Measurement, 1, 385401.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rakowski, W., Fleishman, J. A., Mor, V. and Bryant, S. A. (1993). Self-assessments of health and mortality among older persons do questions other than global self-rated health predict mortality? Research on Aging, 15, 92116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Saghaei, M. (2004). Random allocation software for parallel group randomized trials. BMC Medical Research Methodology, 4, 26.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schoenmakers, B., Buntinx, F. and Delepeleire, J. (2010). Supporting the dementia family caregiver: the effect of home care intervention on general well-being. Aging and Mental Health, 14, 4456.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schulz, R., O’brien, A. T., Bookwala, J. and Fleissner, K. (1995). Psychiatric and physical morbidity effects of dementia caregiving: prevalence, correlates, and causes. The Gerontologist, 35, 771791.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Schulz, R. et al. (2002). Dementia caregiver intervention research In search of clinical significance. The Gerontologist, 42, 589602.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teri, L. et al. (2003). Exercise plus behavioral management in patients with Alzheimer disease. JAMA: The Journal of the American Medical Association, 290, 20152022.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Teri, L. et al. (1998). Exercise and activity level in Alzheimer's disease: a potential treatment focus. Age, 78, 6190.Google Scholar
Teri, L., Truax, P., Logsdon, R., Uomoto, J., Zarit, S. and Vitaliano, P. P. (1992). Assessment of behavioral problems in dementia: the revised memory and behavior problems checklist. Psychol Aging, 7, 622.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Teunisse, S., De Haan, R., Walstra, G. J. M., De Rooij, S. E. J. A. and Zwart, M. (1997). Behavioural problems in mild dementia: clinical relevance and methodological evaluation of the revised memory and behavioural problems checklist. PhD Thesis Clinimetrics in dementia Universiteit van Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Thompson, C. and Briggs, M. (2000). Support for carers of people with Alzheimer's type dementia. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 2, CD000454.Google Scholar
Twisk, J. (1997). Different statistical models to analyze epidemiological observational longitudinal data: an example from the Amsterdam Growth and Health Study. International Journal of Sports Medicine, 18, S216.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Twisk, J. W. (2013). Applied Longitudinal Data Analysis for Epidemiology: A Practical Guide. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Van't Leven, N., Prick, A. E. J., Groenewoud, J. G., Roelofs, P. D., De Lange, J. and Pot, A. M. (2013). Dyadic interventions for community-dwelling people with dementia and their family caregivers: a systematic review. International Psychogeriatrics, 25, 15811603.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Verhage, F. (1964). Intelligence and Age: Study With Dutch People Aged 12–77. Assen: Van Gorcum.Google Scholar
Vernooij-Dassen, M., Draskovic, I., Mccleery, J. and Downs, M. (2011). Cognitive reframing for carers of people with dementia. Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, 11, CD005318.Google Scholar
Wagner, E. H., Lacroix, A. Z., Grothaus, L. C. and Hecht, J. A. (1993). Responsiveness of health status measures to change among older adults. Journal of the American Geriatrics Society, 41, 241248.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Yaffe, K. et al. (2002). Patient and caregiver characteristics and nursing home placement in patients with dementia. JAMA, 287, 20902097.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Zeger, S. L., Liang, K. Y. And Albert, P. S. (1988). Models for longitudinal data: a generalized estimating equation approach. Biometrics, 44, 10491060.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Altmetric attention score

Full text views

Full text views reflects PDF downloads, PDFs sent to Google Drive, Dropbox and Kindle and HTML full text views.

Total number of HTML views: 42
Total number of PDF views: 706 *
View data table for this chart

* Views captured on Cambridge Core between September 2016 - 15th January 2021. This data will be updated every 24 hours.

Hostname: page-component-77fc7d77f9-zjqt5 Total loading time: 0.356 Render date: 2021-01-15T19:18:48.546Z Query parameters: { "hasAccess": "0", "openAccess": "0", "isLogged": "0", "lang": "en" } Feature Flags last update: Fri Jan 15 2021 18:51:58 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) Feature Flags: { "metrics": true, "metricsAbstractViews": false, "peerReview": true, "crossMark": true, "comments": true, "relatedCommentaries": true, "subject": true, "clr": true, "languageSwitch": true, "figures": false, "newCiteModal": false, "shouldUseShareProductTool": true, "shouldUseHypothesis": true, "isUnsiloEnabled": true }

Send article to Kindle

To send this article to your Kindle, first ensure no-reply@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about sending to your Kindle. Find out more about sending to your Kindle.

Note you can select to send to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be sent to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

The effects of a multi-component dyadic intervention on the psychological distress of family caregivers providing care to people with dementia: a randomized controlled trial
Available formats
×

Send article to Dropbox

To send this article to your Dropbox account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Dropbox.

The effects of a multi-component dyadic intervention on the psychological distress of family caregivers providing care to people with dementia: a randomized controlled trial
Available formats
×

Send article to Google Drive

To send this article to your Google Drive account, please select one or more formats and confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your <service> account. Find out more about sending content to Google Drive.

The effects of a multi-component dyadic intervention on the psychological distress of family caregivers providing care to people with dementia: a randomized controlled trial
Available formats
×
×

Reply to: Submit a response


Your details


Conflicting interests

Do you have any conflicting interests? *