Show simple item record

Effect of the WeCareAdvisor™ on family caregiver outcomes in dementia: a pilot randomized controlled trial

dc.contributor.authorKales, Helen C
dc.contributor.authorGitlin, Laura N
dc.contributor.authorStanislawski, Barbara
dc.contributor.authorMyra Kim, H.
dc.contributor.authorMarx, Katherine
dc.contributor.authorTurnwald, Molly
dc.contributor.authorChiang, Claire
dc.contributor.authorLyketsos, Constantine G
dc.date.accessioned2018-05-13T03:28:52Z
dc.date.available2018-05-13T03:28:52Z
dc.date.issued2018-05-10
dc.identifier.citationBMC Geriatrics. 2018 May 10;18(1):113
dc.identifier.urihttps://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-018-0801-8
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/2027.42/143536
dc.description.abstractAbstract Background Behavioral and psychological symptoms of dementia (BPSD) are universal and associated with multiple negative outcomes. This pilot randomized controlled trial (RCT) evaluated the effect of using the WeCareAdvisor, an innovative web-based tool developed to enable family caregivers to assess, manage, and track BPSD. Methods This RCT enrolled 57 dementia family caregivers from community and clinical settings in Ann Arbor, Michigan and Baltimore, Maryland. Participants were randomly assigned to immediate use of the WeCareAdvisor tool (WCA, n = 27) or a Waitlist control group (n = 30) that received the tool after a one-month waiting period. Outcomes for the caregiver and the person they were caring for were assessed at baseline (T0) and one-month followup for both the WCA (T1) and Waitlist control (T2) groups. Results Caregiver mean age was 65.9 ± 14.0 years old. About half (49%) were spouses. Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups except for mean caregiver confidence which was higher in the control group (WCA 35.0 ± 10.0 vs. Waitlist control 39.7 ± 6.9, p = 0.04). There were no significant differences between the WCA and control groups in characteristics of the person with dementia. After their one-month of tool use (T1), WCA caregivers showed significant within group improvement in caregiver distress (− 6.08 ± 6.31 points, t = − 4.82, p < 0.0001) and behavioral frequency (− 3.60 ± 5.05, t = − 3.56, p = 0.002), severity (− 3.24 ± 3.87, t = − 4.19, p = 0.0003) and total behavioral score (− 6.80 ± 10.73, t = − 3.17, p = 004). In the same timeframe, Waitlist control caregivers showed a significant decrease in confidence (− 6.40 ± 10.30, t = − 3.40, p = 0.002). The WCA group showed greater improvement in distress compared to the Waitlist group (T0-T1; t = − 2.49, p = 0.02), which remained significant after adjusting for site and baseline distress. There were no significant between-group differences in caregiver confidence or other secondary outcomes. After their one month of tool use (T2), the Waitlist group also showed significant improvement in caregiver distress (− 3.72 ± 7.53, t = − 2.66, p = 0.013), stress (− 0.41 ± 1.02, t = − 2.19, p = 0.037), confidence (4.38 ± 5.17, t = 4.56, p < 0.0001), burden (− 2.76 ± 7.26, t = − 2.05, p = 0.05), negative communication (− 1.48 ± 2.96, t = − 2.70, p = 0.012) and behavioral frequency (− 1.86 ± 4.58, t = − 2.19, p = 0.037); distress remained significant after adjustment. Conclusions In this pilot RCT, WCA use resulted in a significant decrease in caregiver distress. Future research will identify whether longer use of WCA can impact other caregiver and behavioral outcomes. Trial registration Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02420535 (Date of registry: 4/20/2015, prior to the start of the clinical trial).
dc.titleEffect of the WeCareAdvisor™ on family caregiver outcomes in dementia: a pilot randomized controlled trial
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.description.bitstreamurlhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/143536/1/12877_2018_Article_801.pdf
dc.language.rfc3066en
dc.rights.holderThe Author(s).
dc.date.updated2018-05-13T03:28:53Z
dc.owningcollnameInterdisciplinary and Peer-Reviewed


Files in this item

Show simple item record

Remediation of Harmful Language

The University of Michigan Library aims to describe library materials in a way that respects the people and communities who create, use, and are represented in our collections. Report harmful or offensive language in catalog records, finding aids, or elsewhere in our collections anonymously through our metadata feedback form. More information at Remediation of Harmful Language.

Accessibility

If you are unable to use this file in its current format, please select the Contact Us link and we can modify it to make it more accessible to you.