Charlesworth G, Shepstone L, Wilson E, Thalanany M, Mugford M, Poland F
Centre for Behavioural and Social Sciences in Medicine, University College London, UK.
Health Technol Assess. 2008 Mar;12(4):iii, v-ix, 1-78. doi: 10.3310/hta12040.
To determine whether a social support intervention (access to an employed befriending facilitator in addition to usual care) is effective compared with usual care alone. Also to document direct and indirect costs, and establish incremental cost-effectiveness.
The Befriending and Costs of Caring (BECCA) trial was a cost-effectiveness randomised controlled trial. Data on well-being and resource use were collected through interviews with participants at baseline and at 6, 15 and 24 months.
This research was carried out in the English counties of Norfolk and Suffolk, and the London Borough of Havering. It was a community-based study.
Participants were family carers who were cohabiting with, or providing at least 20 hours' care per week for, a community-dwelling relative with a primary progressive dementia.
The intervention was 'access to a befriender facilitator' (BF). BFs, based with charitable/voluntary-sector organisations, were responsible for local befriending schemes, including recruitment, screening, training and ongoing support of befriending volunteers, and for matching carers with befrienders. The role of befrienders was to provide emotional support for carers. The target duration for befriending relationships was 6 months or more.
Depression was measured by the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) at 15 months postrandomisation. The health-related quality of life scale EQ-5D (EuroQol 5 Dimensions) was used to derive utilities for the calculation of quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs).
A total of 236 carers were randomised into the trial (116 intervention; 120 control). At final follow-up, 190 carers (93 intervention; 97 control) were still involved in the trial (19% attrition). There was no evidence of effectiveness or cost-effectiveness from the primary analyses on the intention-to-treat population. The mean incremental cost per incremental QALY gained was in excess of 100,000 pounds, with only a 42.2% probability of being below 30,000 pounds per QALY gained. Where care-recipient QALYs were included, mean incremental cost per incremental QALY gained was 26,848 pounds, with a 51.4% probability of being below 30,000 pounds per QALY gained. Only 60 carers (52%) took up the offer of being matched with a trained lay befriender, and of these only 37 (32%) were befriended for 6 months or more. A subgroup analysis of controls versus those befriended for 6 months or more found a reduction in HADS-depression scores that approached statistical significance (95% CI -0.09 to 2.84).
'Access to a befriender facilitator' is neither an effective nor a cost-effective intervention in the support of carers of people with dementia, although there is a suggestion of cost-effectiveness for the care dyad (carer and care recipient). In common with many services for carers of people with dementia, uptake of befriending services was not high. However, the small number of carers who engaged with befrienders for 6 months or more reported a reduction in scores on HADS depression that approached statistical significance compared with controls (95% CI -0.09 to 2.84). While providing only weak evidence of any beneficial effect, further research into befriending interventions for carers is warranted.
确定社会支持干预措施(除常规护理外,还可获得一名在职交友促进者的帮助)与单纯常规护理相比是否有效。同时记录直接和间接成本,并确定增量成本效益。
交友与护理成本(BECCA)试验是一项成本效益随机对照试验。通过在基线以及第6、15和24个月对参与者进行访谈,收集有关幸福感和资源使用的数据。
本研究在英国诺福克郡和萨福克郡以及哈弗林伦敦自治市开展。这是一项基于社区的研究。
参与者为家庭护理人员,他们与患有原发性进行性痴呆的社区居住亲属同居,或每周为其提供至少20小时的护理。
干预措施为“获得一名交友促进者的帮助”(BF)。基于慈善/志愿部门组织的交友促进者负责当地的交友计划,包括招募、筛选、培训和持续支持交友志愿者,以及为护理人员与交友者进行配对。交友者的角色是为护理人员提供情感支持。交友关系的目标持续时间为6个月或更长时间。
在随机分组后15个月,采用医院焦虑抑郁量表(HADS)测量抑郁情况。使用健康相关生活质量量表EQ-5D(欧洲五维度健康量表)得出效用值,用于计算质量调整生命年(QALYs)。
共有236名护理人员被随机纳入试验(116名干预组;120名对照组)。在最终随访时,190名护理人员(93名干预组;97名对照组)仍参与试验(失访率为19%)。对意向性治疗人群的初步分析没有发现有效性或成本效益的证据。每获得一个增量QALY的平均增量成本超过100,000英镑,每获得一个QALY低于30,000英镑的概率仅为42.2%。如果将受护理者的QALYs包括在内,每获得一个增量QALY的平均增量成本为26,848英镑,每获得一个QALY低于30,000英镑的概率为51.4%。只有60名护理人员(52%)接受了与一名经过培训的非专业交友者配对的提议,其中只有37名(32%)与交友者建立关系达6个月或更长时间。对对照组与与交友者建立关系达6个月或更长时间的人员进行的亚组分析发现,HADS抑郁评分有所降低,接近统计学显著性(95%CI -0.09至2.84)。
“获得一名交友促进者的帮助”对痴呆症患者护理人员的支持既不是一种有效的干预措施,也不是一种具有成本效益的干预措施,尽管对于护理二元组(护理人员和受护理者)有成本效益的迹象。与许多针对痴呆症患者护理人员的服务一样,交友服务的接受率不高。然而,与对照组相比,少数与交友者建立关系达6个月或更长时间的护理人员报告称,HADS抑郁评分有所降低,接近统计学显著性(95%CI ‐0.09至2.84)。虽然仅提供了任何有益效果的微弱证据,但仍有必要对针对护理人员的交友干预措施进行进一步研究。