Evidence map›Paper›PMID 39146966›Full record

SynthesisGesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany))2025

[How effective are non-pharmacological interventions for family caregivers? A systematic review with meta-analyses].

Patrick Janson, Chu-Wei Hung, Kristina Willeke, Dieter Frisch, Anne Berghöfer, Peter Heuschmann, Andreas Zapf, Manfred Wildner, Carolin Stupp, Thomas Keil

Abstract readSystematic ReviewMeta-AnalysisEnglish Abstract
In one paragraph

Synthesis in Gesundheitswesen (Bundesverband der Arzte des Offentlichen Gesundheitsdienstes (Germany)), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
3citing 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

3 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. 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

10 authors.

Patrick JansonLandesinstitut Gesundheit I, Bayerisches Landesamt für Gesundheit und Lebensmittelsicherheit, Erlangen, Germany.ORCID 0000-0002-3384-4360
Chu-Wei HungLandesinstitut Gesundheit I, Bayerisches Landesamt für Gesundheit und Lebensmittelsicherheit, Erlangen, Germany.
Kristina WillekeLandesinstitut Gesundheit I, Bayerisches Landesamt für Gesundheit und Lebensmittelsicherheit, Erlangen, Germany.
Dieter FrischLandesinstitut Gesundheit I, Bayerisches Landesamt für Gesundheit und Lebensmittelsicherheit, Erlangen, Germany.
Anne BerghöferInstitut für Sozialmedizin, Epidemiologie und Gesundheitsökonomie, Charité-Universitätsmedizin Berlin, Berlin, Germany.
Peter HeuschmannInstitut für Klinische Epidemiologie und Biometrie, Julius-Maximilians-Universität Würzburg, Würzburg, Germany.
Andreas ZapfBayerisches Staatsministerium für Umwelt und Verbraucherschutz, München, Germany.
Manfred WildnerLandesinstitut Gesundheit I, Bayerisches Landesamt für Gesundheit und Lebensmittelsicherheit, Erlangen, Germany.
Carolin StuppLandesinstitut Gesundheit I, Bayerisches Landesamt für Gesundheit und Lebensmittelsicherheit, Erlangen, Germany.
Thomas KeilLandesinstitut Gesundheit I, Bayerisches Landesamt für Gesundheit und Lebensmittelsicherheit, Erlangen, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

introductionInformal caregiving is associated with mental disorders and reduced quality of life. The aim of this systematic review was to summarize the results of methodologically high-quality intervention studies on the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions on patient-relevant outcomes for family caregivers in Germany.

methodWe searched three large scientific literature databases for intervention studies with a control group and a low or moderate risk of bias on the effectiveness of non-pharmacological interventions for family caregivers in Germany.

resultAmong 4,376 publications reviewed, 10 intervention studies with good methodological quality were identified. These investigated multi-component interventions or cognitive behavioral therapy for family caregivers of people with dementia (8 studies), stroke (1 study) and with general care dependency (1 study). The control groups received information material as a minimal intervention or usual standard care. Meta-analyses showed a statistically significant slight reduction in depressive symptoms 3-6 months after the start of the study as a result of cognitive behavioral therapy (standardized mean difference -0.27; 95% confidence interval -0.44 - -0.10), but this no longer reached statistical significance after 9-12 months (-0.21; -0.51 - 0.09). Multi-component interventions showed no changes in depressive symptoms either after 3-6 or after 9-12 months (-0.18; -0.40 - 0.03 and -0.14; -0.47 - 0.14, respectively). In contrast, the mental component of quality of life of family caregivers improved statistically significantly in the multi-component intervention groups compared to the control groups: slightly after 3-6 months (0.28; 0.01 - 0.56) and moderately after 9-12 months (0.45; 0.09 - 0.82). The interventions had no effect on the physical component of quality of life.

conclusionThe reduction of depressive symptoms by behavioral therapy interventions for family caregivers appears to be only slight and not sustainable. The mental component of quality of life of people affected may be improved in the longer term by multi-component interventions. Current scientifically examined interventions for informal caregivers do not appear to have a sufficient and sustainable effect. Greater effects could possibly be achieved through more elaborate behavioral approaches, but also structural preventive measures.

Indexed as

CaregiversCognitive Behavioral TherapyDepressionMental DisordersQuality of LifeAgedEvidence-Based MedicineFemaleGermanyHumansMaleTreatment Outcome

Identifiers

PMID39146966
PMCPMC11849791

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.