Cancer caregiving tasks and consequences and their associations with caregiver status and the caregiver's relationship to the patient:a survey

BACKGROUND: Seriously ill patients often depend on their informal caregivers to help and support them through the disease course. This study investigated informal cancer caregivers’ experiences of caregiving tasks and consequences and how caregiver status (primary vs. non-primary caregiver) and the caregiver’s relationship to the patient (spouse/partner, etc.) are related to these experiences. METHODS: In a cross-sectional questionnaire study, randomly selected cancer patients with a range of diagnoses and disease stages were invited to pass on the ‘Cancer Caregiving Tasks, Consequences and Needs Questionnaire’ (CaTCoN) to 1–3 of their caregivers. RESULTS: A total of 590 caregivers related to 415 (55% of 752 eligible) cancer patients participated. Large proportions of caregivers experienced substantial caregiving workload, e.g., provision of psychological support (74%), as well as a range of negative consequences, most commonly stress (59%). Some caregivers experienced personal growth, but relatively large proportions did not. Caregiver status and the caregiver’s relationship to the patient were associated with some caregiving aspects. Primary caregivers experienced the highest caregiving workload, and non-primary caregivers experienced most problems with getting time off from work. Spouses/partners and/or parents experienced the highest workload, most lack of time for social relations, most financial difficulties, and had the greatest need for seeing a psychologist. They furthermore experienced the highest degree of personal growth and had the smallest need for living a normal life while being a caregiver. Yet, regarding the majority of caregiving aspects, no associations with caregiver status or the caregiver’s relationship to the patient were found. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the findings confirm that cancer caregiving is burdensome. The primary and the closest caregivers seemed to take on most caregiving tasks, but, contrary to expectations, regarding the majority of caregiving consequences non-primary and more distant caregivers were affected to the same degree as the primary and closest caregivers. Initiatives and interventions to support not only the primary caregivers are therefore warranted. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/1471-2407-14-541) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users

Outcomes of a 12-week ecologically valid observational study of first treatment with methylphenidate in a representative clinical sample of drug naïve children with ADHD

Randomized placebo-controlled trials have reported efficacy of methylphenidate (MPH) for Attention-deficit/hyperactivity disorder (ADHD); however, selection biases due to strict entry criteria may limit the generalizability of the findings. Few ecologically valid studies have investigated effectiveness of MPH in representative clinical populations of children. This independently funded study aims to describe treatment responses and their predictors during the first 12 weeks of MPH treatment using repeated measurements of symptoms and adverse reactions (ARs) to treatment in 207 children recently diagnosed with ADHD. The children were consecutively included from the Child and Adolescent Mental Health Centre, Mental Health Services, The Capital Region of Denmark. The children (mean age, 9.6 years [range 7–12], 75.4% males) were titrated with MPH, based on weekly assessments of symptoms (18-item ADHD-rating scale scores, ADHD-RS-C) and ARs. At study-end 187 (90.8%) children reached a mean end-dose of 1.0 mg/kg/day. A normalisation/borderline normalisation on ADHD-RS-C was achieved for 168 (81.2%) children on the Inattention and/or the Hyperactivity-Impulsivity subscale in week 12, and 31 (15.0%) children were nonresponders, which was defined as absence of normalisation/borderline normalisation (n = 19) or discontinuation due to ARs (n = 12), and eight (3.8%) children dropped out from follow-up. Nonresponders were characterised by more severe symptoms of Hyperactivity-Impulsivity and global impairment before the treatment. ARs were few; the most prominent were appetite reduction and weight loss. A decrease in AR-like symptoms during the treatment period questions the validity of currently available standard instruments designed to measure ARs of MPH. This ecologically valid observational study supports prior randomized placebo-controlled trials; 81.2% of the children responded favourably in multiple domains with few harmful effects to carefully titrated MPH. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov with registration number NCT04366609

Effect of the Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool intervention (CSNAT-I) in the Danish specialised palliative care setting: a stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial

Background: The Carer Support Needs Assessment Tool intervention (CSNAT-I) has been shown to improve end-of-life care support for informal caregivers. This study investigated the impact of the CSNAT-I on caregivers of patients recently enrolled in specialised palliative care (SPC) at home in Denmark. Methods: A stepped-wedge cluster randomised controlled trial with nine clusters (ie, SPC teams). Outcome measures were collected using caregiver questionnaires at baseline (T0) and 2-week (T1) and 4-week (T2) follow-up. Results: A total of 437 caregivers were enrolled (control group, n=255; intervention group, n=182). No intervention effect was found on the primary outcome, caregiver strain at T1 (p=0.1865). However, positive effects were found at T1 and T2 on attention to caregivers’ well-being (p<0.0001), quality of information and communication (p<0.0001), amount of information (T1: p=0.0002; T2: p<0.0001), involvement (T1: p=0.0045; T2: p<0.0001), talking about greatest burdens (p<0.0001) and assistance in managing greatest burdens (p<0.0001). The effect sizes of these differences were medium or large and seemed to increase from T1 to T2. At T1, positive effects were found on distress (p=0.0178) and home care responsibility (p=0.0024). No effect was found on the remaining outcomes. Conclusion: Although no effect was found on caregiver strain, the CSNAT-I showed positive effects on caregiver distress, home care responsibility and key outcomes regarding caregivers’ experience of the interaction with healthcare professionals. Trial registration number: NCT03466580