Even before the COVID-19 pandemic, earlier acute care patient discharges, restricted admissions to long-term care, and reduced home care services increased the amount and complexity of family caregivers’ care work. However, much less is known about rural caregivers’ experiences. Thus, our aim in this sequential mixed-methods study was to understand how COVID-19 affected rural family caregivers. Thematically analyzed interviews and linear regression on survey data were used to understand family caregiver stress. Fourteen rural caregivers participated in interviews. They acknowledged that they benefitted from the circle of support in rural communities; however, they all reported having to cope with fewer healthcare and social services. 126 rural caregivers participated in the online survey. About a third (31%) of these caregivers had moderate frailty, indicating that they could benefit from support to improve their health. In linear regression, frailty, social loneliness, financial hardship, and younger age were associated with caregiver anxiety. Contrary to the qualitative reports that people in rural communities are supportive, over two-thirds of the rural caregivers completing the survey were socially lonely. Rural family caregivers are vulnerable to anxiety and social loneliness due to the nature of caregiving and the lack of healthcare and social service supports in rural areas. Primary healthcare and home care teams are well-positioned to assess caregivers’ health and care situation as well as to signpost them to needed supports that are available in their areas.

Background: Family caregivers are a vital yet often under-recognized part of the healthcare system. They provide essential emotional, physical, and logistical support to individuals with illness, disability, or frailty, and their contributions improve continuity of care and reduce system strain. However, many healthcare and social service providers are not equipped to meaningfully engage caregivers as partners. In Alberta, stakeholders validated the Caregiver-Centered Care Competency Framework and identified the need for a three-tiered education model—Foundational, Advanced, and Champion—to help providers recognize, include, and support family caregivers across care settings. This paper focuses on the development and early evaluation of the Advanced Caregiver-Centered Care Education modules, designed to enhance the knowledge and skills of providers with more experience working with family caregivers. The modules emphasize how partnering with caregivers benefits not only the person receiving care but also improves provider effectiveness and supports better system outcomes. Methods: The modules were co-designed with a 154-member interdisciplinary team and grounded in the competency framework. Evaluation used the first three levels of the Kirkpatrick–Barr health workforce education model. We analyzed pre- and post-surveys from the first 50 learners in each module using paired t-tests and examined qualitative feedback and SMART goals through inductive content analysis. Results: Learners reported a high level of satisfaction with the education delivery and the knowledge and skill acquisition. Statistically significant improvements were observed in 53 of 54 pre-post items. SMART goals reflected intended practice changes across all six competency domains, indicating learners saw value in engaging caregivers as partners. Conclusions: The Advanced Caregiver-Centered Care education improved providers’ confidence, knowledge, and skills to work in partnership with family caregivers. Future research will explore whether these improvements translate into real-world practice changes and better caregiver experiences in care planning, communication, and navigation.

Family caregivers and care providers are increasingly becoming more distressed and reaching a breaking point within current systems of care. First Nations family caregivers and the health and community providers employed in First Nations communities have to cope with colonial, discriminatory practices that have caused intergenerational trauma and a myriad of siloed, disconnected, and difficult-to-navigate federal-, provincial/territorial-, and community-level policies and programs. Indigenous participants in Alberta’s Health Advisory Councils described Indigenous family caregivers as having more difficulty accessing support than other Alberta caregivers. In this article, we report on family caregivers’, providers’, and leaders’ recommendations to support First Nations family caregivers and the health and community providers employed in First Nations. We used participatory action research methods in which we drew on Etuaptmumk (the understanding that being in the world is the gift of multiple perspectives) and that Indigenous and non-Indigenous views are complementary. Participants were from two First Nation communities in Alberta and included family caregivers (n = 6), health and community providers (n = 14), and healthcare and community leaders (n = 6). Participants advised that family caregivers needed four types of support: (1) recognize the family caregivers’ role and work; (2) enhance navigation and timely access to services, (3) improve home care support and respite, and (4) provide culturally safe care. Participants had four recommendations to support providers: (1) support community providers’ health and wellbeing; (2) recruit and retain health and community providers; (3) improve orientation for new providers; and (4) offer providers a comprehensive grounding in cultural awareness. While creating a program or department for family caregivers may be tempting to address caregivers’ immediate needs, improving the health of First Nations family caregivers requires a population-based public health approach that focuses on meaningful holistic system change to support family caregivers.

Family caregiving is a public health issue because of caregivers’ significant contribution to the health and social care systems, as well as the substantial impact that giving and receiving care has on the health and quality of life of care receivers and caregivers. While there have been many studies that associate caregivers’ care work, financial difficulty, navigation, and other caregiving factors with family caregivers’ psychological distress, we were interested not only in the factors related to family caregiver anxiety but also in hypothesizing how those effects occur. In this study, we used Andrew Hayes’ PROCESS moderation analysis to explore the link between caregiver frailty, weekly care hours, and perceptions of financial difficulty, social support, and anxiety. In this analysis, we included 474 caregivers with relatively complete data on all of the variables. In regression analysis after controlling for gender and age, social loneliness (β = 0.245), frailty (β = 0.199), financial difficulty (β = 0.196), care time (β = 0.143), and navigation confidence (β = 0.131) were all significant. We then used PROCESS Model 6 to determine the significance of the direct, indirect, and total effects through the serial mediation model. The model pathway from frailty to care time to financial difficulty to social loneliness to anxiety was significant. The proportions of family caregivers who were moderately frail, anxious, and experiencing social loneliness after eighteen months of the COVID-19 pandemic found in this survey should be of concern to policymakers and healthcare providers.

There is a dearth of research on how family caregivers are supported in First Nations. We interviewed family caregivers, health and community providers, and leaders in two Alberta First Nations Communities about their experiences of care and support for the family caregivers in their communities. We employed a qualitative, collaborative participatory action research methodology. We drew on Etuaptmumk, the Mi’kmaw understanding of being in the world is the gift of multiple perspectives. Participants in this research included family caregivers (n = 6), health and community providers (n = 14), and healthcare and community leaders (n = 6). The overarching caregiving theme is the “Hierarchy of challenge”. Six themes capture the challenges faced by family caregivers: (one) “Caregiving is a demanding job”: yet “No one in a sense is taking care of them”; (two) difficult navigation: “I am unable to access that”; (three) delayed assessments and treatment “And I don’t know how they’re being missed”; (four) disconnected health records: “It’s kind of on you to follow up”; (five) racism, “It’s treated differently”; and, (six) social determinants of health, “A lot of these factors have been developing for the longest time”. This study provides evidence that family caregivers’ need to care for and to maintain their own wellbeing is not top of mind in policy or programs in these First Nations communities. As we advocate for support for Canadian family caregivers, we need to ensure that Indigenous family caregivers are also recognized in policy and programs.

Family caregivers provide most daily care for people living with chronic illness or frailty, yet they remain under-recognized in health and social care systems. To address this gap, we co-designed the Caregiver-Centered Care Champions Education Program, which equips frontline providers with the competencies needed to lead caregiver-inclusive change. Guided by the Kirkpatrick-Barr Health Workforce Education Framework, we conducted a mixed methods interpretive description evaluation of learner satisfaction, knowledge and confidence gains, and self-reported behaviour change. Sixty-seven interdisciplinary participants completed three online modules. Quantitative results from pre/post surveys (Wilcoxon signed rank tests) showed significant improvements across all competencies (p < 0.001; large effect sizes) alongside high satisfaction (means 6.56–6.96/7). Qualitative findings revealed that 94% of participants applied program content within three months, and 61% implemented five or more distinct behaviour changes (e.g., collaborative care planning, system navigation support). The analysis illuminated how learners integrated caregiver-centred principles with change leadership strategies. Time constraints and staffing shortages emerged as key barriers. Our co-designed, theory-informed approach effectively bridged individual learning and system change, demonstrating the potential to transform caregiver inclusion practices when supported by organizational policies.