Determining the burden of the family caregivers of people with neuromuscular diseases who use a wheelchair

Thais Pousada, Betania Groba, Laura Nieto-Riveiro, Alejandro Pazos, Emiliano Díez, Javier Pereira, Thais Pousada, Betania Groba, Laura Nieto-Riveiro, Alejandro Pazos, Emiliano Díez, Javier Pereira

Abstract

The present study provides a basic outline of the care and support that family caregivers offer to people affected by neuromuscular diseases.To determine the presence of burden in caregivers of people with neuromuscular diseases who use a wheelchair and to establish whether the presence of burden is influenced by contextual factors, between them, the use of wheelchair.The applied design was cross-sectional and descriptive. The data were collected through a specific questionnaire, the Functional Independence Measure, the Matching Person and Technology form and the Zarit Burden Interview. The caregiver burden was analyzed in relation to different characteristics of the affected people, their wheelchairs, and factors related to the family caregivers themselves. The sample consisted of 41 caregivers, most of them (78.1%) being parents of the affected people.The burden was detected in 71.7% of caregivers. The level of dependence was not related to the presence of burden. Performing care work affected carers' physical health (80.5%), their mood (68.3%), and reduced their leisure time (90.2%). The type of wheelchair and the frequency of its use were not related to the burden.The results suggest that caregivers perceive burden, but its intensity is not related to the seriousness of the disease of the care receiver.

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflicts of interest.

References

    1. Abresch RT, Han JJ, Carter GT. Rehabilitation management in neuromuscular disease. J Neuro Rehabil 1997;11:69–80.
    1. Pieterse AJ, Cup EH, Knuijt S, et al. Development of a tool to guide referral of patients with neuromuscular disorders to allied health services. Part two. Disabil Rehabil 2008;30:863–70.
    1. Ahlstrom G, Lindvall B, Wenneberg S, et al. A comprehensive rehabilitation programme tailored to the needs of adults with muscular dystrophy. Clin Rehabil 2006;20:132–41.
    1. Pousada García T, García TP. Impacto Psicosocial de la Silla de Ruedas en la Vida de las Personas Afectadas por una Enfermedad Neuromuscular. A Coruña: Universidade da Coruña; 2011.
    1. Stuberg W. Home accessibility and adaptative equipment in duchenne muscular dystrophy: a case report. Pediatr Phys Ther 2001;13:169–74.
    1. Louise-Bender PT, Kim J, Weiner B. The shaping of individual meanings assigned to assistive technology: a review of personal factors. Disabil Rehabil 2002;24:5–20.
    1. Mortenson WB, Demers L, Fuhrer MJ, et al. How assistive technology use by individuals with disabilities impacts their caregivers: a systematic review of the research evidence. Am J Phys Med Rehabil 2012;91:984–98.
    1. Crespo López M, López Martínez J. El apoyo a los cuidadores de familiares mayores dependientes en el hogar: desarrollo del programa “Cómo mantener su bienestar”. Madrid: Ministerio de Trabajo y Asuntos Sociales; Secretaría de Estado de Servicios Sociales, Familias y Discapacidad; Instituto de Mayores y Servicios Sociales; 2007.
    1. ASEM F. Guía de Enfermedades Neuromusculares. Información y apoyo a las familias. Vol. 1. Jaen: Formación Alcalá; 2008.
    1. Barral AG. Cuidando al cuidador. Rev Esp Geriatr Gerontol 2003;38:189–91.
    1. Pangalila RF, Van den Bos GA, Stam HJ, et al. Subjective caregiver burden of parents of adults with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Disabil Rehabil 2012;34:988–96.
    1. Given C, Stommel M, Collins C, et al. The caregiver reaction assessment (CRA) for caregivers to persons with chronic physical and mental impairments. Res Nurs Heal 1992;15:271–83.
    1. Carnevale FA, Alexander E, Davis M, et al. Daily living with distress and enrichment: the moral experience of families with ventilator-assisted children at home. Pediatrics 2006;117:e48–60.
    1. Cohen L. Research priorities: wheeled mobility. Disabil Rehabil Assist Technol 2007;2:173–80.
    1. Baiardini I, Minetti C, Bonifacino S, et al. Quality of life in Duchenne muscular dystrophy: the subjective impact on children and parents. J Child Neurol 2011;26:707–13.
    1. Boyer F, Novella JL, Coulon JM, et al. Family caregivers and hereditary muscular disorders: association between burden, quality of life and mental health. Ann Readapt Med Phys 2006;49:16–22.
    1. Boyer F, Drame M, Morrone I, et al. Factors relating to career burden for families of persons with muscular dystrophy. J Rehabil Med 2006;38:309–15.
    1. Im SH, Lee SC, Moon JH, et al. Quality of life for primary caregivers of muscular dystrophy patients in South Korea. Chin Med J (Engl) 2010;123:452–7.
    1. Kenneson A, Bobo JK. The effect of caregiving on women in families with Duchenne/Becker muscular dystrophy. Health Soc Care Community 2010;18:520–8.
    1. Timman R, Tibben A, Wintzen AR. Myotonic dystrophy: the burden for patients and their partners. J Rehabil Med 2010;42:823–30.
    1. World Health Organization. International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health—ICF, Vol. 1. Geneva: WHO; 2001.
    1. Chen JY, Clark MJ. Family function in families of children with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Fam Community Health 2007;30:296–304.
    1. Goldstein LH, Adamson M, Jeffrey L, et al. The psychological impact of MND on patients and carers. J Neurol Sci 1998;160:S114–21.
    1. Smith RO. Measuring the outcomes of assistive technology: challenge and innovation. Assist Technol 1996;8:71–81.
    1. Uniform Data System for Medical. Functional Independence Measure, Version 5.1. New York: Buffalo General Hospital; 1997.
    1. Sharrack B, Hughes RA, Soudain S, et al. The psychometric properties of clinical rating scales used in multiple sclerosis. Brain 1999;122(pt 1):141–59.
    1. Hoffman AJ, Abresch RT, Carter GTJ. Chronic pain in persons with neuromuscular disorders. Phys Med Rehabil Clin N Am 2005;16:1099–112.
    1. Martínez-Martín P, Fernández-Mayoralas G, Frades-Payo B, et al. Validación de la escala de independencia funcional. Gac Sanit 2009;23:49–54.
    1. Galvin JC. Evaluating, Selecting and Using Appropriate Assistive Technology. Gaithersburg, MD: ASPEN Publications; 1996.
    1. Díez E, Verdugo MA, Campo M, et al. Estudio: Necesidad, Predisposición y Ajuste Para el uso de Tecnologías de Ayuda en Estudiantes Universitarios con Discapacidad: Adaptación y Validación de un Instrumento de Evaluación. Salamanca: Instituto Universitario de Integración en la Comunidad; 2008.
    1. Bernd T, Van Der Pijl D, De Witte LP. Existing models and instruments for the selection of assistive technology in rehabilitation practice. Scand J Occup Ther 2009;16:146–58.
    1. Scherer MJ. Matching Person and Technology: A Series of Assessments for Evaluating Predispositions to and Outcomes of Technology Use in Rehabilitation, Education, the Workplace and Other Settings. Webster, NY: Institute for Matching Person and Technology; 1998.
    1. Scherer MJ, Craddock G, Mackeogh T. The relationship of personal factors and subjective well-being to the use of assistive technology devices. Disabil Rehabil 2011;33:811–7.
    1. Neary MA. Type of elder impairment: Impact on caregiver burden, health outcomes and social support. Clin Gerontol 1993;13:47–58.
    1. Scharlach AE. Relieving feelings of strain among women with elderly mothers. Psychol Aging 1987;2:9–13.
    1. Zarit SH, Anthony CR, Boutselis M. Interventions with caregivers of dementia patients: comparison of two approaches. Psychol Aging 1987;2:225–32.
    1. Norris JT, Gallagher D, Wilson A, et al. Assessment of depression in geriatric medical outpatients: the validity of two screening measures. J Am Geriatr Soc 1987;35:989–95.
    1. Clara Pratt C, Wright S, Schmall V. Burden, coping and health status: a comparison of family caregivers to community dwelling and institutionalized Alzheimer's patient. Gerontol Soc Work 1987;10:99–112.
    1. Martín M, Salvadó I, Nadal S, et al. Adpatación para nuestro medio de la Escala de Sobrecarga del Cuidador (Caregiver Burden Interview) de Zarit. Rev Gerontol 1996;6:338–46.
    1. Day HI, Jutai J. Psychosocial Impact of Assistive Devices Scale (PIADS). Manual. Ontario: Department of Physical Medicine & Rehabilitation; 2003.
    1. Day H, Campbell KA. Is telephone assessment a valid tool in rehabilitation research and practice? Disabil Rehabil 2003;25:1126–31.
    1. Segal ME, Ditunno JF, Staas WE. Interinstitutional agreement of individual functional independence measure (FIM) items measured at two sites on one sample of SCI patients. Paraplegia 1993;31:622–31.
    1. Grey N, Kennedy P. The functional independence measure: a comparative study of clinician and self ratings. Paraplegia 1993;31:457–61.
    1. Scherer MJ, Craddock G. Matching Person & Technology (MPT) assessment process. Technol Rehabil 2002;14:125–31.
    1. Duger T, Yilmaz O, Aki E, et al. The environmental barriers of children with muscular dystrophies and its effect on mother's low back pain. Disabil Rehabil 2003;25:1187–92.
    1. Reid DT, Renwick RM. Relating familial stress to the psychosocial adjustment of adolescents with Duchenne muscular dystrophy. Int J Rehabil Res 2001;24:83–93.
    1. Carter GT. Rehabilitation management in neuromuscular disease [Internet]. Vol. 2010. Atlanta, Georgia: eMedicine; 2009. Available from: . (Accessed May 24, 2016.
    1. VVAA. Dossier de Enfermedades Neuromusculares. Minusval 2006;156:15–33.
    1. Hamed R, Tariah HA, Hawamdeh ZM. Personal factors affecting the daily functioning and well-being of patients with multiple sclerosis using the International Classification of Functioning model. Int J Ment Health 2012;41:47–61.
    1. Huber JG, Sillick J, Skarakis-Doyle E. Personal perception and personal factors: incorporating health-related quality of life into the International Classification of Functioning, Disability and Health. Disabil Rehabil 2010;32:1955–65.
    1. Johnston SS, Evans J. Considering response efficiency as a strategy to prevent assistive technology abandonment. J Spec Educ Technol 2005;20:45–50.
    1. Van Haastregt JC, De Witte LP, Terpstra SJ, et al. Membership of a patients’ association and well-being. A study into the relationship between membership of a patients’ association, fellow-patient contact, information received, and psychosocial well-being of people with a neuromuscular disease. Patient Educ Couns 1994;24:135–48.
    1. Natterlund B, Ahlstrom G. Activities of daily living and quality of life in persons with muscular dystrophy. J Rehabil Med 2001;33:206–11.
    1. Brouwer WB, Van Exel NJ, Van de Berg B, et al. Burden of caregiving: evidence of objective burden, subjective burden, and quality of life impacts on informal caregivers of patients with rheumatoid arthritis. Arthritis Rheum 2004;51:570–7.

Source: PubMed

Sponsoren und Mitarbeiter

Krankheiten

Drogeninterventionen

3
Abonnieren