Effectiveness of a support intervention for family caregivers and stroke survivors.
Jaine Kareny da Silva, Rita Narriman Silva de Oliveira Boery
PMID 34495192WHAT IT FOUND
Compared with usual care plus laboratory tests and referral, an 8-month caregiver programme of group education, physiotherapy and psychology consultations showed no significant between-group difference in burden, stress, or survivor independence.
Burden and stress did fall within the programme group.
Key findings
01There was no significant between-group difference in caregiver burden, caregiver stress, or stroke survivor independence at any assessment point.
02In the intervention group, median caregiver burden fell from 33.50 to 25.00, median stress fell from 29.00 to 15.50, and median stroke survivor independence stayed at 4.00.
STILL TO COME
How it was doneWhat they foundWhat it means for RNs
Read the rest of this summary
You get three full summaries a month, free, and we do not ask for a card. Search, the TL;DRs and your library stay unlimited either way.
What it does not show
Only 37 caregivers consented, and the outcome comparison table reports 16 in each group rather than the 20 assigned to intervention and 17 assigned to control; the paper does not explain the difference. The study was not randomized; allocation used minimization, so groups may still differ in ways that affect outcomes. Caregivers and health professionals knew group assignment; only the assessor and statistician were blinded. The intervention bundled group education, physiotherapy and psychology consultations, plus laboratory tests and referral, so the contribution of any single component cannot be separated. The control group received laboratory tests, feedback and referrals, so it was not a pure usual-care comparison. The sample was convenience-based in one Brazilian city, so results may not apply elsewhere.
The easy way to misread this
Do not read the within-group reductions in burden and stress as proof that the intervention works. The between-group comparison of the primary burden outcome was not significant at any time, and the programme combined group sessions, physiotherapy and psychology consultations, while both groups also had laboratory tests and referral, so no single component can be credited.