Skip to content

Accessibility

Addressing psychological morbidity in informal carers at the end of life: evidence synthesis and stakeholder consultation to produce tailored, evidence-based information and priorities

What did we do?

This research project aimed to reduce psychological morbidity amongst carers of people at end of life, through:

 

  • evidence-synthesis of factors that affected the psychological morbidity of carers of people at end of life;
  • the translation of synthesised findings into accessible, tailored information for key stakeholders to support targeted efforts to reduce carer psychological morbidity and its impacts.

 

 

Why was it important?

Some 500,000 UK informal carers provide substantial care and support to people who are nearing end of life, and they may spend an average of 70 hours a week on caregiving in the final months.

 

This can take its toll on carers' psychological health, with 83% of carers suffering high levels of clinically significant psychological morbidity during the patient's final three months; most carers suffer anxiety, depression and stress at levels that give cause for concern.


We know that both external and internal factors affect carers' likelihood of developing psychological morbidity; many of these could addressed by providing targeted, earlier support to those most likely to develop psychological morbidity.

 

However, evidence relating to these factors had not been synthesised, and did not exist in an accessible format for key stakeholders.

 

This reseach project provides the first comprehensive evidence synthesis of the factors that affect the psychological morbidity of carers.

 

How did we do it?

 

WP 1 (Month 1-15): Comprehensive mixed-method literature review and synthesis

We undertook:

  • reviews of quantitative observational studies using box score and meta-analyses,
  • reviews of qualitative studies using a thematic best-fit framework synthesis approach, and
  • reviews of interventions using pooled effect sizes and sub-group analyses.

 

We also integrated the review findings into a framework, which was informed by stress models and carer perspectives.

 

Carer advisors and a carer co-analyst helped to inform the search strategy, qualitative thematic analysis and framework construction to ensure that our outputs were relevant and accessible to carers.

 

WP2 (Month 9-18) Stakeholder involvement

  • We consulted with a wide range of stakeholders to support the translation of the findings from the literertaure reviews and syntheses (from work package 1) to create bespoke information, priorities and procedures.
  • We held a workshop with policy makers, commissioners, researchers, practitioners, and carer representatives to assess the relevance of the findings to their respective spheres of influence (settings and systems), allowing us to identify the most important information and priorities. 
  • We worked with our review advisory panel to develop a range of targetted dissemination outputs and strategies (see findings and downloadable resources sections below for more information).
  • We held a focus groups with practitioners and carers to explore how the project outputs could be operationalised into primary and community care procedures.

 

 

Findings

From the systematic reviews and thematic syntheses of a) observational quantative studies, b) qualitative studies and c) a meta synthesis of the literature, we found there to be seven emergent themes (or factors) that had either positive or negative effects on carers' mental health: 

 

  • Patient condition: worse patient psychological symptoms and quality of life were generally associated with worse carer mental health. Patient depression was associated with higher depression in carers. Patients’ other symptoms and functional impairment may relate to carer mental health, but findings were unclear.
  • Impact of caring responsibilities: impact on carers’ lives, task difficulty and general burden had clear associations with worse carer mental health.
  • Relationships: family dynamics and the quality of the carer–patient relationship may be important for carer mental health and are worthy of further investigation.
  • Finances: insufficient resources may relate to carers’ mental health and warrant further study.
  • Carers’ psychological processes: self-efficacy and preparedness were related to better mental health. However, findings regarding coping strategies were mixed.
  • Support: informal support given by family and friends may relate to better carer mental health, but evidence on formal support is limited. Having unmet needs was related to worse mental health, while satisfaction with care was related to better mental health.
  • Contextual factors: older age was generally associated with better carer mental health and being female was associated with worse mental health.

 

You can also watch this video by Dr Tracey Shield, who talked about some of the early findings in her "Evidence synthesis of factors affecting family carers' psychological wellbeing" presentation at the 17th European Association for Palliative Care (EAPC) World Congress 2021.

 

 

The full findings from all three of the systematic reviews are available in the 'downloadable resources' below. 

 

 

Research team

 

 

Who we worked with:

The research team worked closely with members of the public who had experienced end of life caregiving to:

 

  • develop the research project and secure funding,
  • help us make sense of the information we find
  • co-produce summaries of information for people to use in the future
  • work with us to get the information out to the people who might find it useful

 

We are also worked with various professional people throughout the project, in particular we worked with professional stakeholders to develop and tailor information summaries to the numeorus stakeholder groups that support carers.

 

 

Downloadable resources

 

Blogs & Presentations

 

 

Funding information

This study/project is funded by the National Institute for Health and Care Research (NIHR) Health and Social Care Delivery Research Programme (HS&DR), Award ID: 18/01/01

 

The views expressed are those of the author and not necessarily those of the NIHR or the Department of Health and Social Care.

 

 

 

Contact information

 

 

Programme Manager
Alison Littlewood

alison.littlewood@manchester.ac.uk

 

 

 

 

Please complete the following form to download this item:


Once submitting your information you will be presented with a new 'Download' button to gain access to the resource.