Family Caregivers' Challenges in Cancer Pain Management for Patients Receiving Palliative Care.

CONTEXT: Family caregivers (FCs) of cancer patients play a crucial role in managing their care partner's pain, but little research has examined FCs' specific challenges regarding the provision of pain management (PM) to cancer patients receiving palliative care. OBJECTIVES: To determine the demographic and clinical characteristics of FCs who encounter challenges in PM and to elucidate the specific challenges that FCs face when managing pain for their care partner with cancer. METHODS: We conducted a secondary analysis of 40 interview transcripts of FCs who were caring for persons with cancer. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and analyzed using deductive thematic analysis. RESULTS: The three major identified challenges to PM for FCs of persons with cancer were: (1) communication and teamwork issues, (2) caregiver-related issues, and (3) patient-related issues. Communication and teamwork issues encompassed caregivers' receipt of inadequate information regarding PM, and inappropriate and ineffective communication from the healthcare team. Caregiver issues pertained to caregivers' fear and beliefs, concurrent responsibilities, and lack of pain-related knowledge and skills. Patient issues related to their own fear and beliefs, psychological and physiological well-being, adherence to medications, and reluctance to report pain. CONCLUSION: Findings of this study have implications for future research and practice related to cancer PM in palliative care. Results suggest the need for FC training in PM as well as clear clinical practice guidelines and resources to help providers prepare, educate, and communicate with FCs regarding PM.

Rural age-friendly ecosystems for older adults: An international scoping review with recommendations to support age-friendly communities.

Background and Aims: The population of older adults in rural areas is rising, and they experience higher rates of poverty and chronic illness, have poorer health behaviors, and experience different challenges than those in urban areas. This scoping review seeks to (1) map the state of the science of age-friendly systems in rural areas regarding structural characteristics, processes for delivering age-friendly practices, and outcomes of age-friendly systems, (2) analyze strengths, weakness, opportunities, and threats of age-friendly system implementation, and (3) make person, practice, and policy-level recommendations to support active aging and development of age-friendly communities. Methods: An international scoping review was conducted of articles that used age-friendly framing, had a sample age of 45 years of age or older, self-identified as rural, and reported empiric data. Searches were conducted in PubMed, CINAHL, AgeLine, PsychINFO, EMBASE, Scopus, and Academic Search Elite on October 26, 2021, and rerun March 10, 2023. Data were charted across three analytic layers: socioecological model, Donabedian's framework, and SWOT analysis. Results: Results reveal limited data on outcomes relevant to organizations, such as return on investment or healthcare utilization. While the SWOT analysis revealed many strengths of age-friendly systems, including their impact on persons' outcomes, it also revealed several weaknesses, threats, and gaps. Namely, age-friendly systems have weaknesses due to reliance on trained volunteers and staff, communication, and teamwork. System-level threats include community and health system barriers, and challenges in poor/developing areas. Conclusions: While age-friendly systems in this review were heterogeneous, there is an opportunity to focus on unifying elements including the World Health Organization age-friendly cities framework or 4Ms framework for age-friendly care. Despite the many benefits of age-friendly systems, we must acknowledge limitations of the evidence base, pursue opportunities to examine organizational metrics to support implementation and sustainability of age-friendly systems, and leverage improvements in age-friendliness at a community level.

Resilience-enhancing interventions for family caregivers: A systematic review.

OBJECTIVES: To synthesize interventions designed to enhance resilience in family caregivers (FCs). METHODS: Electronic databases including PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Scopus, were searched using index and keyword methods for articles published before January 2020. The review process followed the PRISMA review guidelines. Study quality was assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool (MMAT). RESULTS: Six studies (seven articles) were included in this review. Quantitative evidence supports the benefits of psychoeducation, mindfulness-based intervention, and cognitive behavioral therapy (CBT)-based intervention but not expressive writing in improving in FCs' resilience. Four of the six included studies were randomized controlled trials. All included studies only met 40% to 60% of the MMAT criteria, indicating low to moderate levels of study quality. CONCLUSION: This review showed emerging evidence that psychoeducation, mindfulness-based intervention, and CBT-based intervention may improve caregiver resilience. However, it remains unclear which intervention and what dosage is the most effective in promoting FCs' resilience. Due to the small number of relevant studies and a low-to-moderate level of overall study quality, more rigorous clinical trials are needed to strengthen the current limited evidence base for FC resilience interventions.

Family Caregiver Challenges in Pain Management for Patients with Advanced Illnesses: A Systematic Review.

Although pain management is integral to the caregiving role, there is a paucity of evidence synthesizing specific challenges family caregivers (FCs) face when managing pain for their care partners. This review comprehensively identified and summarized such challenges in the setting of advanced illnesses. Electronic databases (PubMed, CINAHL, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Health and Psychosocial Instruments) were searched using index and keyword methods for all articles published before April 2021. Fifty-five studies were included in this review. Most articles were published within the last 10 years (54%) in community settings, with home hospice care comprising the majority (50%). Most studies included patients with an advanced cancer diagnosis (84%), and 16% of the studies included patients with a noncancer diagnosis. Four major categories of challenges were identified: (1) caregiver-related issues (e.g., fears, beliefs, function), (2) caregivers' limited knowledge and skills in pain management (e.g., verbal and nonverbal pain assessment skills, pharmacological knowledge, documentation, safe management of medication), (3) communication challenges with health care providers, and (4) patient-related issues (e.g., inability to report pain). Many of these challenges have not been fully addressed in prior literature. Thus, this review provides a framework for needed future research to develop interventions that target FCs' specific challenges in providing pain management. The results also highlight a significant lack of research surrounding challenges faced by caregivers of care partners having a noncancer, dementia, or multimorbidity diagnosis.

Interventions to Support Family Caregivers in Pain Management: A Systematic Review.

CONTEXT: Family caregivers encounter many challenges when managing pain for their loved ones. There is a lack of clear recommendations on how to prepare caregivers in pain management. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate existing interventions that support family caregivers in providing pain management to patients with all disease types. METHODS: Four electronic databases were systematically searched (PubMed, Cumulative Index for Nursing Allied Health Literature, PsycINFO, and Scopus) using index and keyword methods for articles published before December 2019. The Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool was used to assess the quality. RESULTS: The search identified 6851 studies, and 25 studies met the inclusion criteria. Only two studies exclusively focused on noncancer populations (8%). Three types of interventions were identified in this review: educational interventions, cognitive-behavioral interventions, and technology-based interventions. Both educational and cognitive-behavioral interventions improved family caregiver and patient outcomes, but the content and intensity of these interventions in these studies varied widely, and there was a limited number of randomized clinical trials (68%). Hence, it is unclear what strategies are most effective to prepare family caregivers in pain management. Technology-based interventions were feasible to support family caregivers in providing pain management. CONCLUSION: Providing adequate pain management training can improve patient and family caregiver outcomes. However, the most effective interventions for family caregivers are still unclear. More rigorous and replicable clinical trials are needed to examine the effects of educational interventions, cognitive-behavioral interventions, and technology-based interventions. Also, more studies are needed in patients with a noncancer diagnosis or multimorbidity.

Systematic Review of Nonpharmacologic Approaches for the Management of Gastrointestinal Symptoms.

PROBLEM IDENTIFICATION: To summarize and critique the literature for nonpharmacologic complementary approaches to manage gastrointestinal (GI) symptoms attributed to chemotherapy. LITERATURE SEARCH: A literature search was conducted using CINAHL®, MEDLINE®, and PsycINFO® from database inception through January 2018. DATA EVALUATION: Studies were independently appraised by each author regarding inclusion eligibility and summary of GI symptom outcomes and the nonpharmacologic complementary intervention. SYNTHESIS: 57 studies met inclusion criteria. GI symptoms most commonly evaluated as a chemotherapy outcome were nausea and vomiting and nausea alone. GI symptoms infrequently evaluated as outcomes included diarrhea, anticipatory nausea, and dysgeusia. Ten GI symptoms associated with chemotherapy were not evaluated by any study. Nonpharmacologic interventions included 15 different interventions. IMPLICATIONS FOR RESEARCH: Studies evaluating nonpharmacologic interventions for managing chemotherapy-related GI symptoms have been growing but tend to focus on nausea and vomiting to the exclusion of other relevant GI symptoms. Studies evaluating nonpharmacologic effects on other GI symptoms may make great strides in reducing patient symptom burden.