• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

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

日本针对社区居住的长期护理老年人家庭照顾者的自我量化计划中的参与因素。

Participation factors in a self-quantification program for family caregivers of community-dwelling older adults with long-term care in Japan.

作者信息

Wakui Tomoko, Fujihara Satoko, Moriyama Yoko, Nakagawa Takeshi, Okubo Suguru, Obuchi Shuichi, Awata Shuichi, Kai Ichiro

机构信息

Tokyo Metropolitan Institute for Geriatrics and Gerontology, 35-2 Sakae-cho, Itabashi-ku, Tokyo, 173-0015, Japan.

Research & Development Center for Health Services of University of Tsukuba, 1-1-1 Tenno- dai, Tsukuba, 305-8575, Ibaraki, Japan.

出版信息

BMC Res Notes. 2024 Dec 26;17(1):388. doi: 10.1186/s13104-024-07024-y.

DOI:10.1186/s13104-024-07024-y
PMID:39725997
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11670400/
Abstract

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to examine the characteristics of participation in the self-quantification program for family caregivers (CGs) who provide long-term care to community-dwelling older adults. The family CGs, allocated based on the percentage of the nation's older population who needed care and met the inclusion criteria, who provided caregiving at least once a week for those aged 65 + and who were certified as needing care under the Japanese long-term care insurance program, were collected through online monitors. We compared the characteristics of the program participants and nonparticipants using logistic regression.

RESULTS

A total of 2653 family CGs, including 195 study participants who engaged in self-quantification over 60 days and 2,458 nonparticipants who did not engage in self-quantification, were included in the analysis, with complete data available for all variables of interest. The survey included program participants who were predominantly male (55.9%), with an average age of 54.8 years (SD = 10.2). Participants tended to be fully employed (OR = 1.8; p < 0.01), but they were likely to experience greater burdens (OR = 1.8; p < 0.01) and daily caregiving demands (OR = 1.01; p < 0.01). This research highlights the potential efficacy of self-quantification programs for extensively burdened family CGs, illustrating that the requisites for support vary in accordance with the distinct characteristics of these CGs.

摘要

目的

本研究旨在调查参与为社区居住的老年人提供长期护理的家庭照顾者(CG)自我量化计划的特征。通过在线监测收集家庭照顾者,这些照顾者是根据全国需要护理且符合纳入标准的老年人口比例分配的,他们每周至少为65岁及以上的老年人提供一次护理,并根据日本长期护理保险计划被认证为需要护理。我们使用逻辑回归比较了计划参与者和非参与者的特征。

结果

共有2653名家庭照顾者纳入分析,其中包括195名在60天内进行自我量化的研究参与者和2458名未进行自我量化的非参与者,所有感兴趣的变量均有完整数据。调查对象主要为男性(55.9%),平均年龄54.8岁(标准差=10.2)。参与者往往是全职工作(比值比=1.8;p<0.01),但他们可能承受更大的负担(比值比=1.8;p<0.01)和日常护理需求(比值比=1.01;p<0.01)。本研究强调了自我量化计划对负担过重的家庭照顾者的潜在效果,表明支持需求因这些照顾者的不同特征而异。

https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/92d5/11670400/10cc6b6a983a/13104_2024_7024_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/92d5/11670400/10cc6b6a983a/13104_2024_7024_Fig1_HTML.jpg
https://cdn.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/blobs/92d5/11670400/10cc6b6a983a/13104_2024_7024_Fig1_HTML.jpg

相似文献

1
Participation factors in a self-quantification program for family caregivers of community-dwelling older adults with long-term care in Japan.日本针对社区居住的长期护理老年人家庭照顾者的自我量化计划中的参与因素。
BMC Res Notes. 2024 Dec 26;17(1):388. doi: 10.1186/s13104-024-07024-y.
2
Depression among family caregivers of community-dwelling older people who used services under the Long Term Care Insurance program: a large-scale population-based study in Japan.长期护理保险计划下使用服务的居家老年人家庭照顾者的抑郁情况:日本一项基于大规模人群的研究。
Aging Ment Health. 2014;18(1):81-91. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2013.787045. Epub 2013 Apr 30.
3
Examination of reliability and validity of the Self-Assessment Burden Scale-Motor for community-dwelling older adults in Japan: a validation study.日本社区居住老年人自我评估负担量表-运动部分的信度和效度检验:一项验证研究。
PeerJ. 2024 Jul 18;12:e17730. doi: 10.7717/peerj.17730. eCollection 2024.
4
Correlates of Caregiver Participation in a Brief, Community-Based Dementia Care Management Program.照料者参与简短的基于社区的痴呆症照护管理计划的相关因素。
Gerontologist. 2017 Nov 10;57(6):1103-1112. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnw127.
5
[Evaluation of gender differences of family caregivers with reference to the mode of caregiving at home and caregiver distress in Japan].[参照日本家庭护理模式及护理者困扰对家庭护理者性别差异的评估]
Nihon Koshu Eisei Zasshi. 2004 Apr;51(4):240-51.
6
The health of primary caregivers of children with cerebral palsy: how does it compare with that of other Canadian caregivers?脑瘫患儿主要照料者的健康状况:与其他加拿大照料者相比如何?
Pediatrics. 2004 Aug;114(2):e182-91. doi: 10.1542/peds.114.2.e182.
7
Income-based inequalities in caregiving time and depressive symptoms among older family caregivers under the Japanese long-term care insurance system: A cross-sectional analysis.基于收入的不平等:日本长期护理保险制度下老年家庭护理者的护理时间和抑郁症状的比较:一项横断面分析。
PLoS One. 2018 Mar 28;13(3):e0194919. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0194919. eCollection 2018.
8
Older adults with overlapping caregiving responsibilities and care needs in a U.S. national community-based sample.美国全国社区样本中存在重叠照护责任和需求的老年照护者。
J Am Geriatr Soc. 2024 Jun;72(6):1824-1830. doi: 10.1111/jgs.18794. Epub 2024 Feb 12.
9
The health and well-being of caregivers of children with cerebral palsy.脑瘫患儿照料者的健康与幸福。
Pediatrics. 2005 Jun;115(6):e626-36. doi: 10.1542/peds.2004-1689.
10
Family Caregivers of Older Adults, 1999-2015: Trends in Characteristics, Circumstances, and Role-Related Appraisal.1999-2015 年老年患者的家庭护理人员:特征、环境和角色相关评估的趋势。
Gerontologist. 2018 Nov 3;58(6):1021-1032. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnx093.

引用本文的文献

1
Effect of Self-Quantification on Caregiver Burden and Depression Among Family Caregivers: A SWING-Japan Study.自我量化对家庭照顾者照顾负担及抑郁的影响:一项日本SWING研究
Psychogeriatrics. 2025 Jul;25(4):e70053. doi: 10.1111/psyg.70053.

本文引用的文献

1
Effectiveness of the Online Daily Diary (ONDIARY) program on family caregivers of advanced cancer patients: A home-based palliative care trial.在线日常日记(ONDIARY)方案对晚期癌症患者家庭照顾者的有效性:一项基于家庭的姑息治疗试验。
Complement Ther Clin Pract. 2022 Feb;46:101508. doi: 10.1016/j.ctcp.2021.101508. Epub 2021 Nov 2.
2
Why do family dementia caregivers reject caregiver support services? Analyzing types of rejection and associated health-impairments in a cluster-randomized controlled intervention trial.为什么家庭痴呆症照顾者拒绝照顾者支持服务?在一项集群随机对照干预试验中分析拒绝的类型和相关的健康损害。
BMC Health Serv Res. 2020 Feb 14;20(1):121. doi: 10.1186/s12913-020-4970-8.
3
Daily Context for Abusive and Neglectful Behavior in Family Caregiving for Dementia.
日常背景下痴呆患者家庭护理中的虐待和忽视行为。
Gerontologist. 2020 Apr 2;60(3):483-493. doi: 10.1093/geront/gnz110.
4
Family intervention improves outcomes for patients with delirium: Systematic review and meta-analysis.家庭干预可改善谵妄患者的预后:系统评价与荟萃分析。
Australas J Ageing. 2020 Mar;39(1):21-30. doi: 10.1111/ajag.12688. Epub 2019 Jun 28.
5
Using a Flexible Diary Method Rigorously and Sensitively With Family Carers.使用灵活日记法与家庭护理人员进行严格而敏感的沟通。
Qual Health Res. 2019 Jun;29(7):1004-1015. doi: 10.1177/1049732318816081. Epub 2018 Dec 6.
6
User's guide to correlation coefficients.相关系数用户指南。
Turk J Emerg Med. 2018 Aug 7;18(3):91-93. doi: 10.1016/j.tjem.2018.08.001. eCollection 2018 Sep.
7
Dealing with daily challenges in dementia (deal-id study): process evaluation of the experience sampling method intervention 'Partner in Sight' for spousal caregivers of people with dementia.应对痴呆症日常挑战(deal-id 研究):对“伴侣在视线中”体验抽样方法干预措施用于痴呆症患者配偶照顾者的过程评估。
Aging Ment Health. 2018 Sep;22(9):1199-1206. doi: 10.1080/13607863.2017.1348466. Epub 2017 Jul 17.
8
Activity Theory as a Theoretical Framework for Health Self-Quantification: A Systematic Review of Empirical Studies.作为健康自我量化理论框架的活动理论:实证研究的系统综述
J Med Internet Res. 2016 May 27;18(5):e131. doi: 10.2196/jmir.5000.
9
Daily fluctuation in negative affect for family caregivers of individuals with dementia.痴呆症患者家庭照顾者负面情绪的每日波动情况。
Health Psychol. 2015 Jul;34(7):729-40. doi: 10.1037/hea0000175. Epub 2014 Nov 3.
10
Using Effect Size-or Why the P Value Is Not Enough.使用效应量——为何P值并不足够。
J Grad Med Educ. 2012 Sep;4(3):279-82. doi: 10.4300/JGME-D-12-00156.1.