Intervention Nursing Research Using the Cope Intervention

¶ … Intervention

Nursing Research

Using the COPE Intervention for Family Caregivers to Improve Symptoms of Hospice Homecare Patients: A Clinical Trial

This study was designed to test an intervention for hospice caregivers in order to help them better manage symptoms experienced by patients with cancer. The authors maintain that research indicates caregivers are unable to accurately assess and report the intensity of symptoms and overall quality of life (QOL) of patients with cancer and patients in hospice care.

Three symptoms, pain, dyspnea, and constipation, are commonly are seen in patients with advanced cancer. However, the author's site research that asserts that these symptoms are assessed inadequately and managed poorly in many patients. Pain and dyspnea have been found to create symptom distress, significantly affecting patient QOL.

The authors claim that caregivers must develop the skills needed to function effectively as part of the healthcare team. Building the knowledge base and teaching an orderly problem-solving approach to care should improve symptoms for patients and result in increased QOL. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effect of a problem-solving intervention provided to caregivers of hospice homecare patients with cancer.

To this end this study was designed as a three group comparative study. Patients with cancer and their caregivers were divided into three groups: a control group, a group receiving standard care plus friendly visits, and a group receiving standard care plus the COPE (creativity, optimism, planning, and expert information) intervention. The care givers in this last group received experimental training over a nine day period in COPE intervention to assist with symptom management.

This was a longitudinal study with data being collected over a thirty day period using a mix-methods approach. Interviews were conducted to ascertain base levels of pain, dypsnea and constipation. This data was given numerical values and then used to determine the significance of the COPE intervention provided as compared to the control group and the group that received standard care plus friendly visits.

It is significant to note that the authors have developed a manual outlining COPE Intervention and conceivably stand to profit from the sale of this publication. Unfortunately, this taints the findings as it is apparent that the authors have a vested interest in the study's outcome. The authors state that, "Although not effective in improving all outcomes, the intervention was effective in decreasing overall symptom distress in the study's patients."