The Health Promoting Conversations Intervention for Families With a Critically Ill Relative: A Pilot RCT
试验速览
- 阶段
- 不适用
- 状态
- 终止
- 发起方
- 入组人数
- 17
- 试验地点
- 1
- 主要终点
- family functioning
研究概览
简要总结
Objective: We investigated the outcomes of a nurse-led family intervention, Health Promoting Conversations, which focused on family functioning and wellbeing in families with a critically ill member.
Study design: This randomized controlled pilot study used a pre-test, post-test design with intervention and control groups to investigate the outcomes of the nurse-led intervention in 17 families.
Outcome measures: The Health Promoting Conversations intervention was evaluated using validated instruments that measure family functioning and family wellbeing: the General Functioning sub-scale from the McMaster Family Assessment Device; the Family Sense of Coherence, the Herth Hope Index, and the Medical Outcome Short-Form Health Survey. Descriptive and analytical statistical methods were used to analyse the data.
详细描述
This randomized control trial (RCT) used a pre-test, post-test design with intervention and control groups.
In the intervention group, there were 3 health-promoting conversations with each family after the discharge. The health-promoting conversations were held within an approximately 4- to 8-week period with an interval of 2 weeks between conversations. A closing letter was sent 2 to 3 weeks after the final conversation that summarized all of the conversations and that provided further opportunities for reflection.
Baseline data were collected to assess family functioning and wellbeing in the intervention group and the control group 1-2 months after the critical illness and before the start of the intervention. Follow-up assessments were conducted 3 and 12 months after the intervention for both groups. Additionally, background data, including health history, were collected using a self-administered questionnaire that asked about age; sex; education level; habits like smoking, alcohol consumption, and physical activity; psychosocial support; co-morbidity; and risk of mortality. The latter was calculated using the Charlson Comorbidity Index (Charlson et al., 1987).
The main outcome variables in this study were family functioning and family wellbeing. The following instruments were used in this study: 1) General Functioning (GF) sub-scale from the McMaster Family Assessment Device (FAD); 2) Family Sense of Coherence (F-SOC/F-KASAM); 3) Herth Hope Index (HHI); and 4) Medical Outcome Short-Form health survey (SF-36).
研究设计
- 研究类型
- Interventional
- 分配方式
- Randomized
- 干预模型
- Parallel
- 主要目的
- Supportive Care
- 盲法
- None
入排标准
- 年龄范围
- 18 Years 至 —(Adult, Older Adult)
- 性别
- All
- 接受健康志愿者
- 否
入选标准
- •patient age >18 years
- •patient treated in the ICU for at least 96 hours
- •at least one family member (age >15 years) interested in participating
排除标准
- •or other severe psychiatric illnesses
- •drug abuse
- •difficulties in understanding or reading the Swedish language
研究组 & 干预措施
The health-promoting conversations
In the intervention group, there were 3 health-promoting conversations with each family after the discharge. The health-promoting conversations were held within an approximately 4- to 8-week period with an interval of 2 weeks between conversations. A closing letter was sent 2 to 3 weeks after the final conversation that summarized all of the conversations and that provided further opportunities for reflection.
干预措施: The health-promoting conversations (Behavioral)
Control Arm
Usual Care
干预措施: Usual Care (Other)
结局指标
主要结局
family functioning
时间窗: up to 12 months
e GF is a 12-item scale designed to measure self-reported perceived overall 15 family functioning (Wright and Leahey, 2009, 2013). Each item is rated on a four-point 16 Likert scale: 'strongly agree' = 1, 'agree' = 2, 'disagree' = 3 and 'strongly disagree' = 4. The 17 scale scores ranges from 12 to 48, with lower scores indicating better family functioning. The 18 GF was translated into Swedish and has been pilot tested in Swedish samples, and the scale 19 has shown satisfactory reliability and acceptable validity of 0.90 (Bylund et al., 2015). The 20 reliability coefficient alpha was 0.45 in this study.
次要结局
未报告次要终点
研究者
Susanna Ågren
Head of the project
Linkoeping University
