Suppr超能文献

晚期癌症、痴呆症和后天性脑损伤患者非正式照料者负担的比较分析

Comparative Analysis of Informal Caregiver Burden in Advanced Cancer, Dementia, and Acquired Brain Injury.

作者信息

Harding Richard, Gao Wei, Jackson Diana, Pearson Clare, Murray Joanna, Higginson Irene J

机构信息

Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Cicely Saunders Institute, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

Department of Palliative Care, Policy and Rehabilitation, Cicely Saunders Institute, King's College London, London, United Kingdom.

出版信息

J Pain Symptom Manage. 2015 Oct;50(4):445-52. doi: 10.1016/j.jpainsymman.2015.04.005. Epub 2015 Apr 23.

Abstract

CONTEXT

Measurement and improvement of informal caregiver burden are central aims of policy and intervention. Burden itself is a complex construct, and total burden can differ by patient diagnosis, although how diagnosis affects different aspects of caregiver subjective burden is unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To compare the subjective burden of caregivers across three diagnostic groups using the 22-item Zarit Burden Inventory.

METHODS

We performed a secondary analysis of pooled cross-sectional data from four U.K. studies of informal caregivers of patients with advanced cancer (n = 105), dementia (n = 131), and acquired brain injury (ABI) (n = 215). Zarit Burden Inventory totals, subscales (personal and role strain), and individual mean scores were compared between diagnostic groups using the general linear model, adjusting for caregiver characteristics.

RESULTS

Caregiver age (mean years [SD]: cancer 66.1 [12.0]; dementia 61.9 [13.4]; and ABI 53.8 [10.9]) differed significantly across diagnostic groups (P < 0.001); 81.9%, 36.6%, and 59.1% of caregivers were spouse/partners, respectively (P < 0.001). Total burden was highest in ABI caregivers and lowest in cancer (mean total score [SD]: cancer 23.3 [13.4]; dementia 27.9 [16.4]; and ABI 39.1 [17.3]) (P < 0.001). Subscale scores showed similar patterns (mean personal and role subscale scores [SD]: cancer 11.8 [6.9], 5.8 [4.8]; dementia 14.4 [8.8], 7.3 [5.7]; and ABI 18.7 [9.1], 11.8 [6.0]) (P < 0.001 for both subscales). Most (17 of 22) individual item scores differed by diagnosis group (P < 0.05), except concepts of duty, responsibility, and perception of financial situation.

CONCLUSION

Our data show that total, subscale, and most individual elements of caregiver subjective burden differ between cancer, dementia, and ABI caregivers. This should be considered when designing future intervention strategies to reduce caregiver burden in these groups.

摘要

背景

衡量和减轻非正式照护者的负担是政策制定和干预措施的核心目标。负担本身是一个复杂的概念,总体负担会因患者诊断情况而有所不同,不过诊断如何影响照护者主观负担的不同方面尚不清楚。

目的

使用包含22个条目的 Zarit 负担量表比较三个诊断组照护者的主观负担。

方法

我们对来自英国四项研究的汇总横断面数据进行了二次分析,这些研究涉及晚期癌症患者(n = 105)、痴呆症患者(n = 131)和获得性脑损伤(ABI)患者(n = 215)的非正式照护者。使用一般线性模型比较诊断组之间的 Zarit 负担量表总分、子量表(个人和角色压力)及个体平均得分,并对照护者特征进行调整。

结果

诊断组之间照护者年龄(平均年龄[标准差]:癌症组66.1[12.0];痴呆症组61.9[13.4];ABI组53.8[10.9])差异显著(P < 0.001);配偶/伴侣作为照护者的比例分别为81.9%、36.6%和59.1%(P < 0.001)。ABI照护者的总体负担最高,癌症组最低(平均总分[标准差]:癌症组23.3[13.4];痴呆症组27.9[16.4];ABI组39.1[17.3])(P < 0.001)。子量表得分呈现类似模式(平均个人和角色子量表得分[标准差]:癌症组11.8[6.9]、5.8[4.8];痴呆症组14.4[8.8]、7.3[5.7];ABI组18.7[9.1]、11.8[6.0])(两个子量表的P均< 0.001)。除了责任、义务和财务状况认知这些概念外,大多数(22项中的17项)个体项目得分在诊断组之间存在差异(P < 0.05)。

结论

我们的数据表明,癌症、痴呆症和ABI患者照护者在主观负担的总体、子量表及大多数个体因素方面存在差异。在设计未来干预策略以减轻这些群体的照护者负担时应考虑到这一点。

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验