Effectiveness of psychoeducational interventions for family carers of people

[thumbnail of Open Access]
Preview
Text (Open Access) - Published Version
· Available under License Creative Commons Attribution.
· Please see our End User Agreement before downloading.
| Preview
Available under license: Creative Commons Attribution
[thumbnail of Psychoeducation for psychosis carers_Sin et al 2017_authors final draft.pdf]
Text - Accepted Version
· Restricted to Repository staff only
· Available under License Creative Commons Attribution Non-commercial No Derivatives.
Restricted to Repository staff only

Please see our End User Agreement.

It is advisable to refer to the publisher's version if you intend to cite from this work. See Guidance on citing.

Add to AnyAdd to TwitterAdd to FacebookAdd to LinkedinAdd to PinterestAdd to Email

Sin, J., Gillard, S., Spain, D., Cornelius, V., Chen, T. and Henderson, C. (2017) Effectiveness of psychoeducational interventions for family carers of people. Clinical Psychology Review, 56. pp. 13-24. ISSN 0272-7358 doi: 10.1016/j.cpr.2017.05.002

Abstract/Summary

Psychoeducational interventions for family carers of people with psychosis are effective for improving compliance and preventing relapse. Whether carers benefit from these interventions has been little explored. This systematic review investigated the effectiveness of psychoeducation for improving carers' outcomes, and potential treatment moderators. We searched for randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published in English or Chinese in eight databases. Carers' outcomes included wellbeing, quality of life, global morbidities, burden, and expressed emotion. Thirty-two RCTs were included, examining 2858 carers. Intervention duration ranged from 4 to 52 weeks, and contact times ranged from 6 to 42 hours. At post intervention, findings were equivocal for carers' wellbeing (SMD 0.103, 95% CI − 0.186 to 0.392). Conversely, psychoeducation was superior in reducing carers' global morbidities (SMD − 0.230, 95% CI − 0.386 to − 0.075), perceived burden (SMD − 0.434, 95% CI − 0.567 to − 0.31), negative caregiving experiences (SMD − 0.210, 95% CI − 0.396 to − 0.025) and expressed emotion (SMD − 0.161, 95% CI − 0.367 to − 0.045). The lack of available data precluded meta-analysis of outcomes beyond short-term follow-up. Meta-regression revealed no significant associations between intervention modality, duration, or contact time and outcomes. Further research should focus on improving carers' outcomes in the longer-term and identifying factors to optimise intervention design.

Altmetric Badge

Item Type Article
URI https://reading-clone.eprints-hosting.org/id/eprint/70625
Identification Number/DOI 10.1016/j.cpr.2017.05.002
Refereed Yes
Divisions Life Sciences > School of Psychology and Clinical Language Sciences > Psychopathology and Affective Neuroscience
Publisher Elsevier
Download/View statistics View download statistics for this item

Downloads

Downloads per month over past year

University Staff: Request a correction | Centaur Editors: Update this record

Search Google Scholar