Evidence map›Paper›PMID 26108207›Full record

Trial reportBMC geriatrics2015

Protocol for a randomised controlled trial of an outreach support program for family carers of older people discharged from hospital.

Christine Toye, Rachael Moorin, Susan Slatyer, Samar M Aoun, Richard Parsons, Desley Hegney, Sean Maher, Keith D Hill

Abstract readRandomized Controlled Trial
In one paragraph

Trial report in BMC geriatrics, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

8 authors.

Christine ToyeSchool of Nursing, Midwifery and Paramedicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA, 6845, Australia. C.Toye@curtin.edu.au.
Rachael MoorinSchool of Public Health, Curtin University, Perth, WA, 6845, Australia. R.Moorin@curtin.edu.au.
Susan SlatyerSchool of Nursing, Midwifery and Paramedicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA, 6845, Australia. Susan.Slatyer@health.wa.gov.au.
Samar M AounSchool of Nursing, Midwifery and Paramedicine, Faculty of Health Sciences, Curtin University, GPO Box U1987, Perth, WA, 6845, Australia. S.Aoun@curtin.edu.au.
Richard ParsonsSchool of Pharmacy, Curtin University, Perth, WA, 6845, Australia. R.Parsons@curtin.edu.au.
Desley HegneySchool of Nursing and Midwifery, The University of Southern Queensland, Toowoomba, QLD, 4350, Australia. Desley.g.hegney@gmail.com.
Sean MaherDepartment of Rehabilitation and Aged Care, Sir Charles Gairdner Hospital, Perth, WA, 6009, Australia. Sean.Maher@health.wa.gov.au.
Keith D HillSchool of Physiotherapy and Exercise Science, Curtin University, Perth, WA, 6845, Australia. Keith.Hill@curtin.edu.au.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundPresentations to hospital of older people receiving family care at home incur substantial costs for patients, families, and the health care system, yet there can be positive carer outcomes when systematically assessing/addressing their support needs, and reductions in older people's returns to hospital attributed to appropriate discharge planning. This study will trial the Further Enabling Care at Home program, a 2-week telephone outreach initiative for family carers of older people returning home from hospital. Hypotheses are that the program will (a) better prepare families to sustain their caregiving role and (b) reduce patients' re-presentations/readmissions to hospital, and/or their length of stay; also that reduced health system costs attributable to the program will outweigh costs of its implementation. METHODS/

designIn this randomised controlled trial, family carers of older patients aged 70+ discharged from a Medical Assessment Unit in a Western Australian tertiary hospital, plus the patients themselves, will be recruited at discharge (N = 180 dyads). Carers will be randomly assigned (block allocation, assessors blinded) to receive usual care (control) or the new program (intervention). The primary outcome is the carer's self-reported preparedness for caregiving (Preparedness for Caregiving Scale administered within 4 days of discharge, 2-3 weeks post-discharge, 6 weeks post-discharge). To detect a clinically meaningful change of two points with 80 % power, 126 carers need to complete the study. Patients' returns to hospital and subsequent length of stay will be ascertained for a minimum of 3 months after the index admission. Regression analyses will be used to determine differences in carer and patient outcomes over time associated with the group (intervention or control). Data will be analysed using an Intention to Treat approach. A qualitative exploration will examine patients' and their family carers' experiences of the new program (interviews) and explore the hospital staff's perceptions (focus groups). Process evaluation will identify barriers to, and facilitators of, program implementation. A comprehensive economic evaluation will determine cost consequences. DISCUSSION: This study investigates a novel approach to identifying and addressing family carers' needs following discharge from hospital of the older person receiving care. If successful, the program has potential to be incorporated into routine post-discharge support.

trial registrationAustralian and New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry: ACTRN12614001174673 .

Indexed as

CaregiversCommunity-Institutional RelationsPatient DischargeTertiary Care CentersAgedAged, 80 and overAustraliaCost SavingsFemaleHospitalizationHumansMaleNew Zealand

Identifiers

PMID26108207
PMCPMC4479237

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.