The efficacy of a psychosocial intervention for HIV/AIDS caregiving dyads and individual caregivers: A controlled treatment outcome study

• Published in: AIDS care 2002-12, Vol.14 (6), p.731-750
• Main Authors: Pakenham, K. I., Dadds, M. R., Lennon, H. V.
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Subjects: Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome; Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome - psychology; Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome - therapy; Adaptation, Psychological; Adult; AIDS; AIDS/HIV; Analysis of Variance; Australia; Biological and medical sciences; Caregivers; Caregivers - psychology; Carers; Clinical outcomes; Community treatment. Ambulatory treatment. Home care; Dyads; Effectiveness; Efficacy; Female; Follow-Up Studies; Health care; Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice; Health Status; HIV; HIV Infections - psychology; HIV Infections - therapy; Human immunodeficiency virus; Humans; Intervention; Male; Medical sciences; Patient Satisfaction; Patients; Psychology; Psychology. Psychoanalysis. Psychiatry; Psychopathology. Psychiatry; Psychosocial intervention; Randomized controlled trials; Social Adjustment; Treatment Outcome; Treatment Outcomes; Treatments
• ISSN: 0954-0121; 1360-0451
• DOI: 10.1080/0954012021000081313

The present study examined the comparative efficacy of intervening at the caregiver/care-recipient dyadic level, versus the individual caregiver level, for caregivers and their care-recipients with HIV/AIDS. Participants were randomly assigned to a Dyad Intervention (DI), a Caregiver Intervention (CI) or Wait List Control group (WLC), and assessed by interview and self-administered scales immediately before treatment and eight weeks later. Participants in the intervention groups also completed a four-month follow-up assessment. Dependent variables included global distress, social adjustment, dyadic adjustment, subjective health status, HIV/AIDS knowledge and target problem ratings. Results showed that caregivers in the DI group showed greater improvement from pre- to post-treatment on global distress, dyadic adjustment and target problems than the CI and WLC caregivers. The CI and DI caregivers showed greater improvement than the WLC group on all dependent variables except social adjustment. Care-recipients in the DI group improved significantly from pre- to post-treatment on dyadic adjustment, social adjustment, knowledge, subjective health status and Target Problem 1, whereas the CI and WLC care-recipients failed to improve on any of these measures. The treatment gains made by the DI caregivers and care-recipients on most dependent variables were maintained at a four-month follow-up. Findings support a reciprocal determinism approach to the process of dyadic adjustment and suggest that intervening at the caregiver/care-recipient level may produce better outcomes for both the caregiver and care-recipient than intervening at the individual caregiver level.