Abstract TP450: Implementation of Informal Caregiver and Veteran Dyadic Intervention: Acquiring New Skills While Enhancing Remaining Strengths
Abstract only Objectives: ANSWERS-VA dyadic intervention, a strength-based protocol, was adapted for Veterans and their informal Caregivers (CGs). Immediate aims were to tailor the implementation for Veterans and CGs and test the short-term efficacy for improving outcomes of caregiving self-efficacy...
Saved in:
| Published in: | Stroke (1970) Vol. 50; no. Suppl_1 |
|---|---|
| Main Authors: | , , , , , , , , , , , , |
| Format: | Journal Article |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
01-02-2019
|
| Online Access: | Get full text |
| Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
| Summary: | Abstract only
Objectives:
ANSWERS-VA dyadic intervention, a strength-based protocol, was adapted for Veterans and their informal Caregivers (CGs). Immediate aims were to tailor the implementation for Veterans and CGs and test the short-term efficacy for improving outcomes of caregiving self-efficacy and caregiver appraisal of threat.
Methods:
Intervention protocol and materials were modified for telephone delivery to Veterans (n = 130) with definitive diagnosis of stroke and/or traumatic brain injury enrolled at two Level 1 Complexity VA Medical Centers and CGs. Dyads were recruited and randomly assigned to ANSWERS-VA or the attention control group and received 8 telephone sessions with one booster session. Acceptability and feasibility were assessed by participants in the intervention arm. Caregiver threat appraisal and self-efficacy of caregiving were measured in 52 informal CGs randomized to ANSWERS-VA (n = 20) or the attention control group (n = 32) at week 8. Comparisons of two groups in threat appraisal and caregiving self-efficacy were conducted using the Wilcoxon Two-Sample Test.
Results:
Veterans and CGs found ANSWERS-VA an acceptable and feasible approach and reported that sessions were: a) educational, thought- provoking and supportive while simultaneously facilitating communication about difficult issues; and b) provided practical and tailored skills. Preliminary data analyses indicate that CGs assigned to both groups were similar demographically. No significant changes were demonstrated in Caregiver threat appraisal (
p
= 0.74) or caregiving self-efficacy (
p
= 0.71) between both groups at 8 weeks.
Conclusions:
Implementing virtual, dyadic interventions to Veterans with ABI and their informal CGs presented unique challenges: 1) time-intensive processes in pre-implementation phase; 2) field's ambiguity regarding TBI diagnoses and screening protocols within VA Computerized Patient Record System; 3) transition to ICD-10 codes; 4) clear CG eligibility criteria; 5) telephone recruitment; 6) recruitment expertise; and 7) natural disaster, Hurricane Harvey. Though a small sample, analyzing for change in caregiving self-efficacy and caregiver appraisal at 8 weeks may have been premature to determine the short-term efficacy of ANSWERS-VA. |
|---|---|
| ISSN: | 0039-2499 1524-4628 |
| DOI: | 10.1161/str.50.suppl_1.TP450 |