Nichols Linda O, Chang Cyril, Lummus Allan, Burns Robert, Martindale-Adams Jennifer, Graney Marshall J, Coon David W, Czaja Sara
Veterans Affairs Medical Center Memphis, Memphis, Tennessee 38104, USA.
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2008 Mar;56(3):413-20. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-5415.2007.01569.x. Epub 2007 Dec 27.
To examine the cost-effectiveness of a randomized, clinical trial of a home-based intervention for caregivers of people with dementia.
This cost-effectiveness analysis examined Resources for Enhancing Alzheimer's Caregivers Health (REACH II), a multisite, randomized, clinical trial, from June 2002 through December 2004, funded by the National Institute on Aging and the National Institute of Nursing Research, of a behavioral intervention to decrease caregivers' stress and improve management of care recipient behavioral problems.
Community-dwelling dementia caregiving dyads from the Memphis REACH II site.
Of Memphis' random sample of 55 intervention and 57 control black and white dyads, 46 in each arm completed without death or discontinuation. Family caregivers were aged 21 and older, lived with the care recipient, and had provided 4 or more hours of care per day for 6 months or longer. Care recipients were cognitively and functionally impaired.
INTERVENTION(S): Twelve individual sessions (9 home sessions and 3 telephone sessions) supplemented by five telephone support-group sessions. Control caregivers received two "check in" phone calls.
Incremental cost-effectiveness ratio (ICER), the additional cost to bring about one additional unit of benefit (hours per day of providing care).
At 6 months, there was a significant difference between intervention caregivers and control caregivers in hours providing care (P=.01). The ICER showed that intervention caregivers had 1 extra hour per day not spent in caregiving, at a cost of $5 per day.
The intervention provided that most scarce of caregiver commodities--time. The emotional and physical costs of dementia caregiving are enormous, and this intervention was able to alleviate some of that cost.
探讨一项针对痴呆症患者照料者的居家干预随机临床试验的成本效益。
这项成本效益分析考察了“增强阿尔茨海默病照料者健康资源项目(REACH II)”,这是一项多地点随机临床试验,于2002年6月至2004年12月开展,由美国国立衰老研究所和美国国立护理研究所以及美国国立卫生研究院资助,旨在进行一项行为干预,以减轻照料者的压力并改善对受照料者行为问题的管理。
来自孟菲斯REACH II站点的社区居家痴呆症照料二元组。
在孟菲斯随机抽取的55个干预组和57个对照组的黑人和白人二元组中,每组有46个完成试验,无死亡或退出情况。家庭照料者年龄在21岁及以上,与受照料者生活在一起,并且每天提供4小时或更多时间的照料达6个月或更长时间。受照料者存在认知和功能障碍。
12次个体辅导课程(9次居家辅导和3次电话辅导),并辅以5次电话支持小组会议。对照照料者接受两次“报到”电话。
增量成本效益比(ICER),即产生额外一个单位效益(每天提供照料的小时数)所需的额外成本。
在6个月时,干预组照料者和对照组照料者在提供照料的小时数上存在显著差异(P = 0.01)。ICER显示,干预组照料者每天有额外1小时不用花费在照料上,成本为每天5美元。
该干预措施提供了照料者最稀缺的资源——时间。痴呆症照料的情感和身体成本巨大,而这项干预措施能够减轻其中的一些成本。