%0期刊文章%@ 2368-7959 %I JMIR出版物%V 9% 卡塔尔世界杯8强波胆分析N 11% P e41891 %T对患有慢性疾病的成年人的非正式照顾者实施电子精神健康干预:结合定性比较分析和专题综合的混合方法系统综述% a Coumoundouros,Chelsea % a Mårtensson,Erika % a Ferraris,Giulia % a Zuidberg,Justine Margaux % a von Essen,Louise % a Sanderman,Robbert % a Woodford,Joanne %+医疗保健科学和电子保健，Uppsala大学妇女和儿童健康系，mtt -huset:Dag Hammarskjölds väg 14B, 1 tr，乌普萨拉，751 85，瑞典，46 729 999 211,chelsea.coumoundouros@kbh.uu.se %K非正式护理人员%K e -心理健康%K实施%K慢性疾病%K系统综述%K专题综合%K定性比较分析%K实施研究统一框架%D 2022 %7 30.11.2022 %9综述%J JMIR Ment健康%G英语%X背景:非正式护理人员普遍经历与其护理角色相关的心理健康困难。电子心理健康干预措施以非正式护理人员更容易获得的形式提供心理健康支持。然而，电子心理健康干预措施很少在现实实践中实施。目的:本混合方法系统综述旨在研究与成人慢性疾病非正式照护者电子心理健康干预的有效性和实施相关的因素。为了实现这一目标，采用了两种方法:使用定性比较分析探讨了足以使干预效果的实施和干预特征的结合，并使用专题综合探讨了对非正式照顾者实施电子心理健康干预的障碍和促进因素。方法:通过系统检索6个电子数据库和各种二次检索策略，筛选出2007年1月1日至2022年7月6日发表的相关研究。纳入的研究报告了对患有癌症、慢性阻塞性肺病、痴呆症、糖尿病、心脏病或中风的成年人的非正式照护者进行电子心理健康干预的有效性或实施情况。报告照护者心理健康结果的随机对照试验被纳入一项清晰的定性比较分析。 We assessed randomized controlled trials for bias using the Risk of Bias 2.0 tool, and we assessed how pragmatic or explanatory their trial design was using the Pragmatic Explanatory Continuum Indicator Summary 2 tool. Studies of any design reporting on implementation were included in a thematic synthesis using the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research to identify barriers to and facilitators of implementation. Results: Overall, 53 reports, representing 29 interventions, were included in the review. Most interventions (27/29, 93%) focused on informal cancer or dementia caregivers. In total, 14 reports were included in the qualitative comparative analysis, exploring conditions including the presence of peer or professional support and key persuasive design features. Low consistency and coverage prevented the determination of condition sets sufficient for intervention effectiveness. Overall, 44 reports were included in the thematic synthesis, and 152 barriers and facilitators were identified, with the majority related to the intervention and individual characteristic domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. Implementation barriers and facilitators in the inner setting (eg, organizational culture) and outer setting (eg, external policies and resources) domains were largely unexplored. Conclusions: e–Mental health interventions for informal caregivers tend to be well-designed, with several barriers to and facilitators of implementation identified related to the intervention and individual user characteristics. Future work should focus on exploring the views of stakeholders involved in implementation to determine barriers to and facilitators of implementing e–mental health interventions for informal caregivers, focusing on inner and outer setting barriers and facilitators. Trial Registration: PROSPERO (International Prospective Register of Systematic Reviews) CRD42020155727; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020155727 International Registered Report Identifier (IRRID): RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2019-035406 %M 36314782 %R 10.2196/41891 %U https://mental.www.mybigtv.com/2022/11/e41891 %U https://doi.org/10.2196/41891 %U http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36314782