Evans Isabelle, Patel Ria, Stoner Charlotte R, Melville Mel, Spector Aimee
Faculty of Brain Sciences, Division of Psychology and Language Sciences, Research Department of Clinical, Educational and Health Psychology, University College London, Gower Street, London WC1E 6BT, UK.
Centre for Chronic Illness and Ageing, Institute of Life Course Development, School of Human Sciences, University of Greenwich, Old Royal Naval College, Park Row, London SE10 9LS, UK.
Behav Sci (Basel). 2024 Feb 24;14(3):177. doi: 10.3390/bs14030177.
With the increasing prevalence of dementia worldwide, there is a growing need for an integrated approach to dementia care. Little is known at present about the benefits of educational interventions for informal caregivers of people living with dementia (PLWD) in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). This review aimed to identify and synthesise the current research on these interventions. Four databases (PsycINFO, Medline, Web of Sciences and Scopus) were searched, alongside Google Scholar and reference lists. The Downs and Black checklist was used for quality assessment and data relating to intervention characteristics, outcomes, and educational component features were compared. Eighteen papers detailing 17 studies were included. All studies presented found at least one significant outcome/effect. Study comparison was difficult due to diverse methodologies, intervention structures, and outcomes. Study quality was also variable. Four studies had education as the primary focus, and most interventions utilised multicomponent and group-based designs. Interventions that included group delivery tended to find more significant results than individual approaches. Intervention length did not appear to influence efficacy. Regular delivery and an average intervention dosage of around 12 h appeared most effective. Research into educational interventions for caregivers in LMICs appears to be promising and can help guide future interventions towards clinical implementation. A multicomponent group intervention trialled in Egypt provided particularly favourable findings. Future studies should focus on understanding the active mechanisms within such interventions to optimize their effectiveness. Collaboration between LMICs, high-income countries (HICs), and caregivers is crucial in developing interventions tailored to meet caregiver needs whilst accounting for feasibility and equity for dementia care worldwide.
随着痴呆症在全球范围内的患病率不断上升,对痴呆症护理采取综合方法的需求日益增长。目前,关于中低收入国家(LMICs)中痴呆症患者(PLWD)的非正式照护者接受教育干预的益处,人们了解甚少。本综述旨在识别和综合有关这些干预措施的当前研究。我们检索了四个数据库(PsycINFO、Medline、科学网和Scopus),同时检索了谷歌学术和参考文献列表。使用唐斯和布莱克清单进行质量评估,并比较与干预特征、结果和教育组成部分特征相关的数据。纳入了18篇详细介绍17项研究的论文。所有呈现的研究都至少发现了一个显著的结果/效果。由于方法、干预结构和结果各不相同,研究比较困难。研究质量也参差不齐。四项研究将教育作为主要重点,大多数干预措施采用多成分和基于小组的设计。采用小组授课的干预措施往往比个别方法能取得更显著的结果。干预时长似乎并未影响疗效。定期授课且平均干预时长约为12小时似乎最为有效。对中低收入国家照护者进行教育干预的研究似乎前景广阔,有助于指导未来干预措施的临床实施。在埃及进行试验的一项多成分小组干预措施取得了特别有利的结果。未来的研究应专注于了解此类干预措施中的有效机制,以优化其效果。中低收入国家、高收入国家(HICs)和照护者之间的合作对于开发满足照护者需求的干预措施至关重要,同时要考虑到全球痴呆症护理的可行性和公平性。