Aging & mental health · 2026
A mixed methods evaluation of the Residential Care Transition Module.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Gaugler Joseph E, Albers Elizabeth A, Birkeland Robyn W, Urbanski Dana P
Аннотация
OBJECTIVES: A post-hoc, mixed methods analysis of a randomized controlled trial of a 12-month psychosocial and psychoeducational telehealth intervention to support dementia caregivers of cognitively impaired relatives living in residential long-term care settings (the Residential Care Transition Module/RCTM) was conducted to identify and test potentially new mechanisms and outcomes of the RCTM.
METHOD: Two hundred and forty caregivers were randomly assigned to the RCTM treatment condition or to usual care as the control group and were administered quarterly surveys. Participants in the treatment condition provided qualitative data on perceptions of intervention benefits on follow-up surveys and semi-structured interviews conducted after the 12-month intervention (n = 30). New mechanisms and outcomes identified in the qualitative analysis were mapped onto existing items and scales (e.g. single items from the Short Sense of Competence Questionnaire) and re-analyzed quantitatively using general linear models.
RESULTS: The mixed methods analysis suggested that dementia caregivers in the RCTM group were more confident in their ability to obtain information about and arrange services (e.g. legal and financial planning, long-term care ombudsman) than controls and were less likely to report annoyance with care recipients' behaviors.
CONCLUSION: The mixed methods results advance our understanding of the RCTM's potential efficacy, and the adoption of similar methodologies may yield greater insights into how and why dementia care interventions are beneficial, even in the face of initial null findings.
METHOD: Two hundred and forty caregivers were randomly assigned to the RCTM treatment condition or to usual care as the control group and were administered quarterly surveys. Participants in the treatment condition provided qualitative data on perceptions of intervention benefits on follow-up surveys and semi-structured interviews conducted after the 12-month intervention (n = 30). New mechanisms and outcomes identified in the qualitative analysis were mapped onto existing items and scales (e.g. single items from the Short Sense of Competence Questionnaire) and re-analyzed quantitatively using general linear models.
RESULTS: The mixed methods analysis suggested that dementia caregivers in the RCTM group were more confident in their ability to obtain information about and arrange services (e.g. legal and financial planning, long-term care ombudsman) than controls and were less likely to report annoyance with care recipients' behaviors.
CONCLUSION: The mixed methods results advance our understanding of the RCTM's potential efficacy, and the adoption of similar methodologies may yield greater insights into how and why dementia care interventions are beneficial, even in the face of initial null findings.