TY - JOUR
T1 - Biopsychosocial Intervention for Stroke Carers (BISC)
T2 - Results of a Feasibility Randomised Controlled Trial and Nested Qualitative Interview Study
AU - Walker, Marion
AU - Birchall, Sheila
AU - Cobley, Christine
AU - Condon, Laura
AU - Fisher, Rebecca
AU - Fletcher-Smith, Joanna
AU - Golding-Day, Miriam
AU - Greensmith, Christopher
AU - Kontou, Eirini
AU - Matias, Oliver
AU - Sprigg, Nikola
AU - Thomas, Shirley
AU - Whitehead, Phillip
N1 - Funding Information:
The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: The sponsor for this study is the University of Nottingham, Research and Graduate Services, King’s Meadow Campus, Lenton Lane, Nottingham, NG7 2NR. This study is independent research funded by the National Institute for Health Research (Research for Patient Benefit Programme, Biopsychosocial Intervention for Stroke Carers (BISC), PB-PG-0613-31064) and the principal investigator was supported by ARC East Midlands. The views expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the NHS, the National Institute for Health Research or the Department of Health.
PY - 2020/10/1
Y1 - 2020/10/1
N2 - Objective: To determine the feasibility of recruiting to and delivering a biopsychosocial intervention for carers of stroke survivors. Design: Feasibility randomised controlled study with nested qualitative interview study. Setting: The intervention was delivered in the community in either a group or one-to-one format. Subjects: Carers and stroke survivors within one year of stroke onset. Interventions: A carer targeted intervention delivered by a research psychologist in six structured two-hour sessions or usual care control. The intervention combined education about the biological, psychological and social effects of stroke with strategies and techniques focussing on adjustment to stroke and caregiving. Stroke survivors in both groups received baseline and follow-up assessment but no intervention. Main Outcome: Recruitment rate, study attrition, fidelity of intervention delivery, acceptability and sensitivity of outcome measures used (health related quality of life, anxiety and depression and carer burden six months after randomisation). Results: Of the 257 carers approached, 41 consented. Six withdrew before randomisation. Eighteen participants were randomised to receive the intervention and 17 to usual care. Attendance at sessions was greater when treated one-to-one. Feedback interviews suggested that participants found the intervention acceptable and peer support particularly helpful in normalising their feelings. Thirty participants were assessed at follow-up with improvements from baseline on all health measures for both groups. Conclusions: Our results suggest that a biopsychosocial intervention was acceptable to carers and can be delivered in group and one-to-one formats. Timing of approach and mode of intervention delivery is critical and requires tailoring to the carers individual needs.
AB - Objective: To determine the feasibility of recruiting to and delivering a biopsychosocial intervention for carers of stroke survivors. Design: Feasibility randomised controlled study with nested qualitative interview study. Setting: The intervention was delivered in the community in either a group or one-to-one format. Subjects: Carers and stroke survivors within one year of stroke onset. Interventions: A carer targeted intervention delivered by a research psychologist in six structured two-hour sessions or usual care control. The intervention combined education about the biological, psychological and social effects of stroke with strategies and techniques focussing on adjustment to stroke and caregiving. Stroke survivors in both groups received baseline and follow-up assessment but no intervention. Main Outcome: Recruitment rate, study attrition, fidelity of intervention delivery, acceptability and sensitivity of outcome measures used (health related quality of life, anxiety and depression and carer burden six months after randomisation). Results: Of the 257 carers approached, 41 consented. Six withdrew before randomisation. Eighteen participants were randomised to receive the intervention and 17 to usual care. Attendance at sessions was greater when treated one-to-one. Feedback interviews suggested that participants found the intervention acceptable and peer support particularly helpful in normalising their feelings. Thirty participants were assessed at follow-up with improvements from baseline on all health measures for both groups. Conclusions: Our results suggest that a biopsychosocial intervention was acceptable to carers and can be delivered in group and one-to-one formats. Timing of approach and mode of intervention delivery is critical and requires tailoring to the carers individual needs.
KW - Stroke
KW - biopsychosocial
KW - carers
KW - complex intervention
KW - randomised controlled trial
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85086788057&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1177/0269215520937039
DO - 10.1177/0269215520937039
M3 - Article
C2 - 32567356
SN - 0269-2155
VL - 34
SP - 1268
EP - 1281
JO - Clinical Rehabilitation
JF - Clinical Rehabilitation
IS - 10
M1 - 026921552093703
ER -