| Literature DB >> 31013289 |
Barbara Bucki1,2, Elisabeth Spitz2, Michèle Baumann1.
Abstract
For patients, the social and emotional repercussions of stroke include shame, personality changes, and upheavals experienced by the couple (i.e. patient and main family caregiver). These impacts on the couple 'patient/family caregiver' are scarcely documented. Focusing on the perceptions of the patients and the family caregivers living at home, two years after a stroke occurrence, the aims of the study were to analyse the concordance of attitudes towards the emotional and social repercussions of stroke and to determine the profiles of the differing dyads. Two researchers conducted separate face-to-face structured interviews with stroke survivors and their family caregivers. Eleven items, identified through a content analysis of interviews and after a qualitative process of generating questionnaire items, assessed the commonly experienced impact of stroke on the family, the social repercussions of stroke, and its emotional effects on the stroke survivors. The kappa concordance coefficient was used to determine the response convergence between patients and family caregivers. Four items, selected by a panel of experts, were included in logistic regressions (i.e., demographic characteristics and patients' impaired functions) to identify the differing dyadic profiles. Family caregivers' and patients' attitudes towards the social repercussions of stroke were similar. Patients with motor deficiencies tended to underestimate the upheaval brought to their couple by stroke, whereas caregivers of language-impaired patients tended to underestimate their feelings of shame and demeaning. Communication disturbances, but also residual physical disabilities in stroke survivors, may affect the understanding of each other's attitudes within dyads. In order to avoid dysfunctional relationships between family caregivers and patients, healthcare professionals need to pay special attention to this issue, especially in cases of aphasia and motor deficiencies.Entities:
Mesh:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31013289 PMCID: PMC6478282 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0215425
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Description of the sampling process.
Socio-demographic and health characteristics of the 56 dyad members.
| Patients | Caregivers | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| N | % | n | % | ||||||
| Sex | Women | 21 | 37.5 | 36 | 64.3 | ||||
| Men | 35 | 62.5 | 20 | 35.7 | |||||
| Relationship to patient | Spouse | 50 | 89.3 | ||||||
| Child | 5 | 8.9 | |||||||
| Other | 1 | 1.8 | |||||||
| Educational level | Below 12th grade | 25 | 44.6 | 24 | 42.9 | ||||
| 12th grade and above | 31 | 55.4 | 32 | 57.1 | |||||
| Residual impairment domains | Motor | 22 | 39.3 | ||||||
| Vision | 12 | 21.4 | |||||||
| Sensory | 28 | 50.0 | |||||||
| Language | 18 | 32.1 | |||||||
| Memory | 21 | 37.5 | |||||||
| Character | 9 | 16.1 | |||||||
| Incontinence | 6 | 10.7 | |||||||
| Number of deficiencies | 0 | 13 | 23.2 | ||||||
| 1 | 10 | 17.9 | |||||||
| 2 | 9 | 16.1 | |||||||
| 3 or more | 24 | 42.9 | |||||||
| Age (mean, sd) | 63.3 (15.3) | 59.1 (13.8) | |||||||
Patients' and caregivers' attitudes towards stroke repercussions and dyad concordance.
| Patients | Caregivers | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agree | Disagree | Agree | Disagree | Concordance | |||
| % | % | % | % | % | K | P | |
| 1. Upheaval in the family | 55.4 | 44.5 | 64.3 | 35.7 | 76.8 | 0.52 | 0.000 |
| 2. Upheaval in the couple | 22.6 | 77.4 | 38.9 | 61.1 | 62.9 | 0.39 | 0.002 |
| 3. Distance with children | 08.2 | 91.8 | 09.8 | 90.2 | 66.1 | 0.14 | 0.319 |
| 4. Expressions of sympathy | 83.9 | 16.1 | 75.9 | 24.1 | 71.0 | 0.43 | 0.001 |
| 5. Family bonds strengthened | 66.1 | 33.9 | 69.2 | 30.8 | 54.8 | 0.21 | 0.120 |
| 6. Friend bonds strengthened | 87.3 | 12.7 | 90.9 | 09.1 | 71.0 | 0.07 | 0.623 |
| 7. Loss of friends | 09.3 | 90.7 | 08.9 | 91.1 | 79.0 | 0.39 | 0.003 |
| 8. Social life maintained | 73.2 | 26.8 | 80.4 | 19.6 | 67.6 | 0.30 | 0.020 |
| 9. Patient feels demeaned | 44.6 | 55.4 | 25.5 | 74.5 | 51.6 | 0.20 | 0.121 |
| 10. Patient’s personality changed | 42.9 | 57.1 | 53.6 | 46.4 | 64.5 | 0.43 | 0.001 |
| 11. Patient ashamed of seeing friends | 12.5 | 87.5 | 03.6 | 96.4 | 79.0 | 0.18 | 0.102 |
Significance levels:
*p<0.05
**p<0.01
***p≤0.001.
Response distribution for the four illustrative items.
| Patients | ||||
| Agree | Disagree | Total | ||
| Caregivers | Agree | 08 | 05 | 13 |
| Disagree | 14 | 24 | 38 | |
| Total | 22 | 29 | 51 | |
| Patients | ||||
| Agree | Disagree | Total | ||
| Caregivers | Agree | 1 | 01 | 02 |
| Disagree | 6 | 48 | 54 | |
| Total | 7 | 49 | 56 | |
| Patients | ||||
| Agree | Disagree | Total | ||
| Caregivers | Agree | 19 | 11 | 30 |
| Disagree | 05 | 21 | 26 | |
| Total | 24 | 32 | 56 | |
| Patients | ||||
| Agree | Disagree | Total | ||
| Caregivers | Agree | 09 | 11 | 20 |
| Disagree | 03 | 30 | 33 | |
| Total | 12 | 41 | 53 | |
Logistic regressions of the discordant groups for the four items.
| B | S.E. | B | S.E. | B | S.E. | B | S. E. | p | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | -2.04 | 2.91 | 0.482 | -8.92 | 4.47 | 0.046 | -1.75 | 4.32 | 0.686 | -1.97 | 2.11 | 0.350 | |
| Age of the caregiver | -0.06 | 0.05 | 0.235 | -0.01 | 0.07 | 0.930 | 0.04 | 0.06 | 0.432 | -0.08 | 0.06 | 0.226 | |
| Age of the patient | 0.03 | 0.04 | 0.455 | 0.03 | 0.06 | 0.603 | -0.04 | 0.05 | 0.442 | 0.06 | 0.06 | 0.272 | |
| Sex of the caregiver | Women | 1.69 | 2.12 | 0.424 | 2.82 | 2.80 | 0.313 | 0.95 | 3.91 | 0.809 | - | - | |
| Men | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||
| Sex of the patient | Women | 1.17 | 1.98 | 0.554 | 2.31 | 2.31 | 0.316 | -1.62 | 3.87 | 0.675 | - | - | |
| Men | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||
| Motor impairment | Yes | 0.60 | 0.90 | 0.507 | 0.35 | 1.37 | 0.798 | 0.38 | 0.95 | 0.691 | 2.14 | 1.00 | 0.027 |
| No | - | - | - | 0 | - | ||||||||
| Vision impairment | Yes | -0.52 | 1.05 | 0.622 | 0.48 | 1.18 | 0.686 | -0.38 | 1.08 | 0.725 | -1.83 | 1.24 | 0.142 |
| No | - | - | - | 0 | - | ||||||||
| Sensory impairment | Yes | 0.28 | 0.97 | 0.773 | 0.63 | 1.70 | 0.710 | 0.71 | 0.91 | 0.434 | 0.10 | 1.00 | 0.922 |
| No | - | - | - | 0 | - | ||||||||
| Language impairment | Yes | 2.11 | 1.00 | 0.036 | 2.56 | 1.37 | 0.063 | -0.25 | 1.01 | 0.808 | -1.04 | 1.09 | 0.342 |
| No | - | - | - | 0 | - | ||||||||
| Memory impairment | Yes | -0.86 | 1.00 | 0.393 | 0.17 | 1.21 | 0.887 | -1.01 | 1.03 | 0.331 | 1.38 | 0.88 | 0.115 |
| No | - | - | - | 0 | - | ||||||||
| Incontinence | Yes | 2.73 | 1.47 | 0.064 | -1.37 | 2.05 | 0.505 | -0.79 | 1.41 | 0.574 | - | - | |
| No | - | - | - | - | - | ||||||||
Significance levels:
#p<0.1
*p<0.05.