Individual Abstract within a Delegate Designed Symposium 2025 Joint Meeting of the COSA ASM and IPOS Congress

Caring for the Carer’s online intervention: A useful intervention to ease care of people with brain tumour   (126667)

Helen M Haydon 1 , Thea Blackler 2 , Georgia Halkett 3 , Centaine L Snoswell 1 , Roshni Mendis 1 , Monica Taylor 1 , Anna Nowak 4 , Eng-Siew Koh 5 , Raymond Chan 6 , Ursula Sansom-Daly 7 , Mark Pinkham 8 , Tamara Ownsworth 9 , Kerryn Pike 9 , Brian Kelly 10 , Robyn Leonard 11 , Joanne Shaw 12 , Dianne Legge 3 , Katarzyna Lion 9 , Sian Virtue-Griffiths 9 , Joel Rhee 13 , Meera Agar 14 , Haryana Dhillon 12
  1. The University of Queensland, Woolloongabba, QUEENSLAND, Australia
  2. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane, Queensland , Australia
  3. Curtin University, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
  4. University of Western Australia, Perth, Western Australia, Australia
  5. New South Wales Health, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  6. Flinders University, Adelaide, South Australia, Australia
  7. University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  8. Queensland Health, Brisbane, Queensland , Australia
  9. Griffith University, Brisbane, Queensland , Australia
  10. University of Newcastle, Newcastle, New South Wales, Australia
  11. Consumer Advisor, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  12. The University of Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia
  13. University of Woollongong, Woollongong, New South Wales, Australia
  14. University of Technology Sydney, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia

Objectives/purpose: i) To determine the efficacy of ‘Caring for the Carer’ an online intervention to increase preparedness to care for people with brain tumour; and, ii) explore reported intervention usefulness and useability.

Sample and setting: Carers of primary brain tumour patients were recruited through cancer and brain tumour support organisations, social media, and snowballing. 

Procedures: A randomised wait-list control design assigned users to either immediate website access or delayed access after two months. Online surveys were disseminated at baseline and two months post-intervention access. Surveys measured demographics, carer preparedness, intervention usefulness and ease-of-use. Administered at baseline and follow-up, preparedness was measured using the Preparedness for Caregiving Scale, an eight-item validated self-report scale.  Mean baseline preparedness responses were compared to means from the immediate and waitlist group using a t-test. All Likert scales for preparedness, useability, and usefulness were analysed by assessing the central tendency and examining movement between time points.  

 

Results: Sixty-six baseline and 53 follow-up surveys were completed (April 2022-August 2024). Follow-up surveys were completed by 22 carers who received immediate access and 31 waitlisted carers.  There were no statistically significant differences in the baseline to follow-up Preparedness for Caregiving, regardless of website access. Of the 40 who responded to the usefulness questions, more than half agreed the website made caring for the person easier (63%, n=25) and enabled completion of care tasks more efficient (50%, n=20). Of the 39 ease-of-use scale responses, 82% (n=32) agreed the intervention was easy to use, and 77% (n=30) agreed it was easy to use for “patient” care and management. Participant demographics, study allocation and intervention usage patterns will be presented.

Conclusion and clinical implications: The intervention was viewed as beneficial and easy to use for most carers who trialled it. However, their preparedness scores did not improve statistically during the trial.