Comparison of the sustainability of the impact of team-based versus individual clinician-focused training of primary care professionals in serious illness conversations on caregiver burden of care: a secondary analysis of a cluster randomized trial

Training health professionals in serious illness conversations is important for patients with serious illnesses and for their caregivers. However, most training focuses on individual clinicians rather than on healthcare teams. Caregivers of their patients are highly sensitive to changes in communication dynamics in the healthcare setting. We aimed to compare the impact of a team-based training program in serious illness conversations with that of an individual clinician-focused training program on the burden of care of caregivers of patients with serious illnesses, and the sustainability of these impacts over time. We performed a secondary analysis of caregivers’ data from a preliminary cluster randomized trial in the USA and Canada in which 42 primary care clinics were randomized to an interprofessional team-based training arm (intervention) or an individual clinician-focused training arm (control). Seriously ill patients who had had a serious illness conversation with the trained clinicians were asked to refer a caregiver. We used the Zarit Burden Interview (range: 0–48) to assess caregiver burden immediately after the serious illness conversation (T1), six months later (T2) and 12 months later (T3). Statistical analyses using a linear mixed model were performed to compare caregiver burden between the two arms at the three times. We included 192 caregivers from 42 primary care clinics. Most were female (67.8%); aged 65–74 (28.6%). The mean caregiver burden scores were low, and similar in both the arms at the three times. The difference in mean burden between the two study arms was 1.05 (95% CI -1.47 to 3.59; p = 0.40), -0.24 (95% CI -2.57 to 2.08; p = 0.82), and 0.09 (95% CI -2.61 to 2.81; p = 0.94) at T1, T2 and T3 respectively. The p-value of the interaction term between study arm and time was p = 0.47. Mean difference between arms after performing a model with time effect and after adjusting was 0.90 (95% CI -0.76 to 2.57; p = 0.28). Various other factors such as caregivers feeling anxious or depressed were associated with caregiver burden. Analysis showed that there was no difference between perceived caregiver burden after the interprofessional team-based training approach and after the individual clinician-focused training approach. Our study did however underline the importance of recognizing other factors influencing caregiver well-being. ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT03577002).

Authors

Institutions

Publication Details

Journal
BMC Geriatrics
Published
2025-10-21
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12877-025-06324-7
Primary Topic
Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
Type
article
Field-Weighted Citation Impact
0.00

Funders

Controls
|||
ALL TIME
JAN
FEB
MAR
APR
MAY
JUN
JUL
AUG
SEP
OCT
article

Comparison of the sustainability of the impact of team-based versus individual clinician-focused training of primary care professionals in serious illness conversations on caregiver burden of care: a secondary analysis of a cluster randomized trial

Judy Katz, Patrick Archambault, Jodi Lapidus, Dalil Asmaou Bouba et al.
BMC Geriatrics
Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
article

Comparison of the sustainability of the impact of team-based versus individual clinician-focused training of primary care professionals in serious illness conversations on caregiver burden of care: a secondary analysis of a cluster randomized trial

Judy Katz, Patrick Archambault, Jodi Lapidus, Dalil Asmaou Bouba, France Légaré, Taryn Bogdewiecz, Barcey T. Levy, Jean‐Sébastien Paquette, Sarina Schrager, Kirsten Hanrahan, Elizabeth Fernley, Suélène Georgina Dofara, Lyle J. Fagnan, Matthew O. Howard, Deborah Dokken, Louis‐Paul Rivest, Berre Burch, Sabrina Guay-Bélanger, Jessica Ma, Jeanette M. Daly, Deb Constien, Shigeko Izumi, Meredith K. Warman, Jacqueline D. Alikhaani, James Pantelas, Annette M Totten, Angela Combe, Sarah Bumatay, Souleymane Gadio, Odilon Quentin Assan, David A. Dorr, Donald E. Nease, Megan Schmidt, Olga Petrova, Kirsten Wentlandt, Mary Minniti, David Nowels, Katrina Ramsey, Sean P. M. Rice, Rowena J Dolor, Michelle Greiver, Carson Halliwell, Kathy Kastner, Peter Kim, S Hagen, Mary F. Henningfield, Sharon E. Straus, Susan Lowe, Gurmeet Kaur Brar, LeAnn Michaels, Kouessiba Lorielle Lokossou, Claude-Bernard Uwizeye, Gail Drey, Keith Provin, Kylie Lanman
article en

Abstract

Training health professionals in serious illness conversations is important for patients with serious illnesses and for their caregivers. However, most training focuses on individual clinicians rather than on healthcare teams. Caregivers of their patients are highly sensitive to changes in communication dynamics in the healthcare setting. We aimed to compare the impact of a team-based training program in serious illness conversations with that of an individual clinician-focused training program on the burden of care of caregivers of patients with serious illnesses, and the sustainability of these impacts over time. We performed a secondary analysis of caregivers’ data from a preliminary cluster randomized trial in the USA and Canada in which 42 primary care clinics were randomized to an interprofessional team-based training arm (intervention) or an individual clinician-focused training arm (control). Seriously ill patients who had had a serious illness conversation with the trained clinicians were asked to refer a caregiver. We used the Zarit Burden Interview (range: 0–48) to assess caregiver burden immediately after the serious illness conversation (T1), six months later (T2) and 12 months later (T3). Statistical analyses using a linear mixed model were performed to compare caregiver burden between the two arms at the three times. We included 192 caregivers from 42 primary care clinics. Most were female (67.8%); aged 65–74 (28.6%). The mean caregiver burden scores were low, and similar in both the arms at the three times. The difference in mean burden between the two study arms was 1.05 (95% CI -1.47 to 3.59; p = 0.40), -0.24 (95% CI -2.57 to 2.08; p = 0.82), and 0.09 (95% CI -2.61 to 2.81; p = 0.94) at T1, T2 and T3 respectively. The p-value of the interaction term between study arm and time was p = 0.47. Mean difference between arms after performing a model with time effect and after adjusting was 0.90 (95% CI -0.76 to 2.57; p = 0.28). Various other factors such as caregivers feeling anxious or depressed were associated with caregiver burden. Analysis showed that there was no difference between perceived caregiver burden after the interprofessional team-based training approach and after the individual clinician-focused training approach. Our study did however underline the importance of recognizing other factors influencing caregiver well-being. ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT03577002).

BMC GeriatricsVol. 25(1)
Oregon Health & Science University (US), Institut National de Santé Publique du Québec (CA), Centre Intégré de Santé et Services Sociaux de Chaudière-Appalache (CA), Centre hospitalier de l'Université Laval (CA), Centre intégré de santé et de services sociaux de Chaudière-Appalaches (CA), Centres Intégré Universitaires de Santé et de Services Sociaux (CA), Research Network (United States) (US), Université Laval (CA)
Langley Research Center
Openalex Percentile: Top 60%
Palliative Care and End-of-Life Issues
DOIOpen Access PDFOpenAlex
AI Navigator

Ask Laika to Summarize, Analyze, and Connect papers live on the map.

Summarize Papers & Methodologies

Extract key findings, datasets, and comparative methods across publications.

Benchmark Rankings & Visual Analytics

Rank top research institutions, authors, funders, topics, and journals by Field-Weighted Citation Impact (FWCI) and paper volume with instant charts.

Connect Distant Disciplines

Bridge topological clusters on the map to find hidden collaborative intersections.