Comparison of two psycho-educational family group interventions for improving psycho-social outcomes in persons with spinal cord injury and their caregivers: a randomized-controlled trial of multi-family group intervention versus an active education control condition

Dennis G Dyck, Douglas L Weeks, Sarah Gross, Crystal Lederhos Smith, Hilary A Lott, Aimee J Wallace, Sonya M Wood, Dennis G Dyck, Douglas L Weeks, Sarah Gross, Crystal Lederhos Smith, Hilary A Lott, Aimee J Wallace, Sonya M Wood

Abstract

Background: Over 12,000 individuals suffer a spinal cord injury (SCI) annually in the United States, necessitating long-term, complex adjustments and responsibilities for patients and their caregivers. Despite growing evidence that family education and support improves the management of chronic conditions for care recipients as well as caregiver outcomes, few systematic efforts have been made to involve caregivers in psycho-educational interventions for SCI. As a result, a serious gap exists in accumulated knowledge regarding effective, family-based treatment strategies for improving outcomes for individuals with SCI and their caregivers. The proposed research aims to fill this gap by evaluating the efficacy of a structured adaptation of an evidence-based psychosocial group treatment called Multi-Family Group (MFG) intervention. The objective of this study is to test, in a randomized-controlled design, an MFG intervention for the treatment of individuals with SCI and their primary caregivers. Our central hypothesis is that by providing support in an MFG format, we will improve coping skills of persons with SCI and their caregivers as well as supportive strategies employed by caregivers.

Methods: We will recruit 32 individuals with SCI who have been discharged from inpatient rehabilitation within the previous 3 years and their primary caregivers. Patient/caregiver pairs will be randomized to the MFG intervention or an active SCI education control (SCIEC) condition in a two-armed randomized trial design. Participants will be assessed pre- and post-program and 6 months post-program. Intent to treat analyses will test two a priori hypotheses: (1) MFG-SCI will be superior to SCIEC for SCI patient activation, health status, and emotion regulation, caregiver burden and health status, and relationship functioning, and (2) MFG will be more effective for individuals with SCI and their caregivers when the person with SCI is within 18 months of discharge from inpatient rehabilitation compared to when the person is between 19 and 36 months post discharge.

Discussion: Support for our hypotheses will indicate that MFG-SCI is superior to specific education for assisting patients and their caregivers in the management of difficult, long-term, life adjustments in the months and years after SCI, with increased efficacy closer in time to the injury.

Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02161913 . Registered 10 June 2014.

Keywords: Caregiver; Multi-family group treatment; Psycho-educational intervention; Spinal cord injury; Study protocol.

References

    1. National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center . Facts and figures at a glance. Birmingham: University of Alabama at Birmingham; 2015.
    1. National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center . Recent trends in causes of spinal cord injury. Birmingham: University of Alabama at Birmingham; 2015.
    1. Lucke KT, Martinez H, Mendez TB, Arevalo-Flechas LC. Resolving to go forward: the experience of Latino/Hispanic family caregivers. Qual Health Res. 2013;23:218–30. doi: 10.1177/1049732312468062.
    1. Facts and Figures at a Glance. The National Spinal Cord Injury Statistical Center Web site. . 2013. Accessed 3 Jun 2013.
    1. Guilcher SJT, Casciaro T, Lemieux-Charles L, Craven C, McColl MA, Jagial SB. Social networks and secondary health conditions: the critical secondary team for individuals with spinal cord injury. J Spinal Cord Med. 2012;35:330–42. doi: 10.1179/2045772312Y.0000000035.
    1. Burke DA, Linden RD, Zhang YP, Maiste AC, Shields CB. Incidence rates and populations at risk for spinal cord injury: a regional study. Spinal Cord. 2001;39:274–8. doi: 10.1038/sj.sc.3101158.
    1. The incidence and prevalence of spinal cord injury in Canada: overview and estimates based on current evidence. The Urban Future Web site. . 2010. Accessed 3 Jun 2013.
    1. North NT. The psychological effects if spinal cord injury: a review. Spinal Cord. 1999;37:671–9. doi: 10.1038/sj.sc.3100913.
    1. Schulz R, Czaja SJ, Lustig A, Zdaniuk B, Martire LM, Perdomo D. Improving the quality of life of caregivers of persons with spinal cord injury: a randomized clinical trial. Rehabil Psychol. 2009;54:1–15. doi: 10.1037/a0014932.
    1. Waite LJ, Hughes ME. At risk on the cusp of old age: living arrangements and functional status among Black, White, and Hispanic adults. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 1999;54:S136–44. doi: 10.1093/geronb/54B.3.S136.
    1. Craig A, Tran Y, Middleton J. Psychological morbidity and spinal cord injury: a systematic review. Spinal Cord. 2009;47:108–14. doi: 10.1038/sc.2008.115.
    1. Post MWM, van Leeuwen CMC. Psychosocial issues in spinal cord injury: a review. Spinal Cord. 2012;50:382–9. doi: 10.1038/sc.2011.182.
    1. Post MW, Bloemen J, de Witte LP. Burden of support for partners of persons with spinal cord injuries. Spinal Cord. 2005;43:311–19. doi: 10.1038/sj.sc.3101704.
    1. Hughes ME, Waite LJ, LaPierre TA, Luo Y. All in the family: the impact of caring for grandchildren on grandparents’ health. J Gerontol B Psychol Sci Soc Sci. 2007;62:S108–19. doi: 10.1093/geronb/62.2.S108.
    1. Boschen KA, Tonack M, Gargaro J. The impact of being a support provider to a person living in the community with a spinal cord injury. Rehabil Psychol. 2005;50:397–07. doi: 10.1037/0090-5550.50.4.397.
    1. Kester BL, Rothblum ED, Lobato D, Milhous RL. Spouse adjustment to spinal cord injury: long term medical and psychosocial factors. Rehabil Couns Bull. 1988;23:4–21.
    1. Weitzenkamp DA, Gerhart KA, Charlifue SW, Whiteneck GG, Savic G. Spouses of spinal cord injury survivors: the added impact of care giving. Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 1997;78:822–27. doi: 10.1016/S0003-9993(97)90194-5.
    1. Pilling S, Bebbington P, Kuipers E, Garety P, Geddes J, et al. Psychological treatments in schizophrenia: I. Meta-analysis of family intervention and cognitive behaviour therapy. Psychol Med. 2002;32:763–82.
    1. Mueser KT, Noordsy DL, Drake RE, Fox L. Integrated treatment for dual disorders: a guide to effective practice. New York: Guilford Press; 2003.
    1. Glynn SM, Dixon LB, Cohen A, Murray-Swank A. The family member provider outreach program. Psychiatr Serv. 2008;59:934. doi: 10.1176/ps.2008.59.8.934.
    1. Rodgers ML, Strode AD, Norell DM, Short RA, Dyck DG, Becker B. Adapting multiple-family group treatment for brain and spinal cord injury intervention development and preliminary outcomes. Am J Phys Med Rehabil. 2007;86:482–92. doi: 10.1097/PHM.0b013e31805c00a1.
    1. Dyck DG, Hendryx MS, Short RA, Voss WD, McFarlane WR. Service use among patients with schizophrenia in psychoeducational multiple-family group treatment. Psychiatr Serv. 2002;53:749–54. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.53.6.749.
    1. Perlick DA, Straits-Troster K, Strauss JL, et al. Implementation of multifamily group treatment for veterans with traumatic brain injury. Psychiatr Serv. 2013;64:534–40. doi: 10.1176/appi.ps.001622012.
    1. McFarlane WR. Multiple family groups in the treatment of severe psychiatric disorders. New York: Guilford Press; 2002.
    1. Hammond MC, Burns SC, editors. Yes, you can!: A guide to self-care for persons with spinal cord injury. 4. Washington, D. C.: Paralyzed Veterans of America; 2009.
    1. Hibbard JH, Stockard J, Mahoney ER, Tusler M. Development of the Patient Activation Measure (PAM): conceptualizing and measuring activation in patients and consumers. Health Serv Res. 2004;39:1005–26. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2004.00269.x.
    1. Greene J, Hibbard JH. Why does patient activation matter? An examination of the relationships between patient activation and health-related outcomes. J Gen Intern Med. 2012;27:520–6. doi: 10.1007/s11606-011-1931-2.
    1. Hibbard JH, Mahoney ER, Stock R, Tusler M. Do increases in patient activation result in improved self-management behaviors? Health Serv Res. 2007;42:1443–63. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2006.00669.x.
    1. Donald M, Ware RS, Ozolins IZ, Begum N, Crowther R, Bain C. The role of patient activation in frequent attendance at primary care: a population-based study of people with chronic disease. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;83:217–21. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.05.031.
    1. Harvey L, Fowles JB, Xi M, Terry P. When activation changes, what else changes? The relationship between change in patient activation measure (PAM) and employees’ health status and health behaviors. Patient Educ Couns. 2012;88:338–43. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.02.005.
    1. Knight RG, Chisholm BJ, Paulin JM, Waal-Manning HJ. The Spielberger Anger Expression Scale: some psychometric data. Br J Clin Psychol. 1988;27:279–81. doi: 10.1111/j.2044-8260.1988.tb00792.x.
    1. Koenig HG, Westlund RE, George LK, Hughes DC, Blazer DG, Hybels C. Abbreviating the Duke Social Support Index for use in chronically ill elderly individuals. Psychosomatics. 1993;34:61–9. doi: 10.1016/S0033-3182(93)71928-3.
    1. Irwin M, Artin KH, Oxman MN. Screening for depression in the older adult: Criterion validity of the 10-item Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression Scale (CES-D) Arch Int Med. 1999;159:1701–4. doi: 10.1001/archinte.159.15.1701.
    1. Novak M, Guest C. Application of a multidimensional caregiver burden inventory. Gerontologist. 1989;29:798–803. doi: 10.1093/geront/29.6.798.
    1. Cockburn JT, Thomas FN, Cockburn OJ. Solution-focused therapy and psychosocial adjustment to orthopedic rehabilitation in a work hardening program. J Occup Rehabil. 1997;7:97–106. doi: 10.1007/BF02765880.
    1. McCubbin HI, Olson DH, Larsen AS, Corcoran K, Fischer J. Family crisis orientated personal evaluation scales [F-COPES] In: Corcoran K, Fischer J, editors. Measures for clinical practice: a sourcebook. 3. New York: Free Press; 2000. pp. 294–7.
    1. Cicerone K, Levin H, Malec J, Stuss D, Whyte J. Cognitive rehabilitation interventions for executive function: Moving from bench to bedside in patients with traumatic brain injury. J Cogn Neurosci. 2006;18:1212–22. doi: 10.1162/jocn.2006.18.7.1212.

Source: PubMed

Patrocinadores e Colaboradores

Condições médicas

Intervenções de drogas

3
Se inscrever