ScholarWorksIndianapolis
  • Communities & Collections
  • Browse ScholarWorks
  • English
  • Català
  • Čeština
  • Deutsch
  • Español
  • Français
  • Gàidhlig
  • Italiano
  • Latviešu
  • Magyar
  • Nederlands
  • Polski
  • Português
  • Português do Brasil
  • Suomi
  • Svenska
  • Türkçe
  • Tiếng Việt
  • Қазақ
  • বাংলা
  • हिंदी
  • Ελληνικά
  • Yкраї́нська
  • Log In
    or
    New user? Click here to register.Have you forgotten your password?
  1. Home
  2. Browse by Author

Browsing by Author "Naylor, Mary D."

Now showing 1 - 1 of 1
Results Per Page
Sort Options
  • Loading...
    Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Caregiver Engagement Enhances Outcomes among Randomized Control Trials of Transitional Care Interventions: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    (Wolters Kluwer, 2022) Levoy, Kristin; Rivera, Eleanor; McHugh, Molly; Hanlon, Alexandra; Hirschman, Karen B.; Naylor, Mary D.; School of Nursing
    Background: Fluctuations in health among chronically ill adults result in frequent health care transitions. Some interventions to improve patient outcomes after hospitalization include caregiver engagement as a core component, yet there is unclear evidence of the effects of this component on outcomes. Objective: The objective of this study was to synthesize evidence regarding the attention given to caregiver engagement in randomized control trials of transitional care interventions (TCIs), estimate the overall intervention effects, and assess caregiver engagement as a moderator of intervention effects. Methods: Three databases were systematically searched for randomized control trials of TCIs targeting adults living with physical or emotional chronic diseases. For the meta-analysis, overall effects were computed using the relative risk (RR) effect size and inverse variance weighting. Results: Fifty-four studies met criteria, representing 31,291 participants and 66 rehospitalizations effect sizes. Half (51%) the interventions lacked focus on caregiver engagement. The overall effect of TCIs on all-cause rehospitalizations was nonsignificant at 1 month (P=0.107, k=29), but significant at ≥2 months [RR=0.89; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.82, 0.97; P=0.007, k=27]. Caregiver engagement moderated intervention effects (P=0.05), where interventions with caregiver engagement reduced rehospitalizations (RR=0.83; 95% CI: 0.75, 0.92; P=0.001), and those without, did not (RR=0.97; 95% CI: 0.87, 1.08; P=0.550). Interventions with and without caregiver engagement did not differ in the average number of components utilized, however, interventions with caregiver engagement more commonly employed baseline needs assessments (P=0.032), discharge planning (P=0.006), and service coordination (P=0.035). Discussion: Future TCIs must consistently incorporate the active participation of caregivers in design, delivery, and evaluation.
About IU Indianapolis ScholarWorks
  • Accessibility
  • Privacy Notice
  • Copyright © 2025 The Trustees of Indiana University