Abshire Saylor Martha, DeGroot Lyndsay, Pavlovic Noelle, McIlvennan Colleen K, Taylor Janiece, Gilotra Nisha A, Gallo Joseph J, Davidson Patricia M, Wolff Jennifer L, Szanton Sarah L
J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2023 Apr 12. doi: 10.1097/JCN.0000000000000987.
Caregiving for persons with heart failure (HF) varies based on the individual, family, and home contexts of the dyad, yet the dyadic context of HF caregiving is poorly understood.
The aim of this study was to explore dyadic perspectives on the context of caregiving for persons with HF.
Family caregivers and persons with HF completed surveys and semistructured interviews. Investigators also photographed caregiving areas to complement home environment data. Descriptive qualitative analysis resulted in 7 contextual domains, and each domain was rated as strength, need, or neutral. We grouped dyads by number of challenging domains of context, categorizing dyads as high (≥3 domains), moderate (1-2 domains), or minimal (0 domains) needs. Quantitative instruments included the 36-item Short Form Health Survey, ENRICHD Social Support, HF Symptom Severity, and Zarit Burden Interview. We applied the average score of each quantitative measure to the groups derived from the qualitative analysis to integrate data in a joint display.
The most common strength was the dyadic relationship, and the most challenging domain was caregiving intensity. Every dyad had at least 2 domains of strengths. Of 12 dyads, high-needs dyads (n = 3) had the worst average score for 7 of 10 instruments including caregiver and patient factors. The moderate-needs dyads (n = 6) experienced the lowest caregiver social support and mental health, and the highest burden.
Strengths and needs were evident in all patient-caregiver dyads with important distinctions in levels of need based on assessment of multiple contextual domains. Comprehensive dyadic and home assessments may improve understanding of unmet needs and improve intervention tailoring.
针对心力衰竭(HF)患者的照护因个体、家庭及二元组的家庭环境而异,但HF照护的二元组背景仍未得到充分理解。
本研究旨在探讨针对HF患者照护背景的二元组观点。
家庭照护者和HF患者完成了调查问卷及半结构化访谈。研究者还拍摄了照护区域以补充家庭环境数据。描述性定性分析得出7个背景领域,每个领域被评为优势、需求或中性。我们根据背景中具有挑战性的领域数量对二元组进行分组,将二元组分为高需求(≥3个领域)、中度需求(1 - 2个领域)或低需求(0个领域)。定量工具包括36项简短健康调查问卷、ENRICHD社会支持量表、HF症状严重程度量表和扎里特负担访谈量表。我们将每项定量测量的平均得分应用于从定性分析得出的组,以在联合展示中整合数据。
最常见的优势是二元组关系,最具挑战性的领域是照护强度。每个二元组至少有2个优势领域。在12个二元组中,高需求二元组(n = 3)在包括照护者和患者因素在内的10项工具中的7项上平均得分最差。中度需求二元组(n = 6)的照护者社会支持和心理健康水平最低,负担最重。
在所有患者 - 照护者二元组中,优势和需求都很明显,基于对多个背景领域的评估,需求水平存在重要差异。全面的二元组和家庭评估可能会增进对未满足需求的理解,并改善干预措施的针对性。