Katie E Nelson1, Martha Abshire Saylor2, Annabel Anderson2, Harleah Buck3, Patricia M Davidson4, Lyndsay DeGroot2, Marlena Fisher2, Nisha A Gilotra5, Noelle Pavlovic2, Sarah L Szanton6. 1. Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA. Electronic address: knelso46@jhmi.edu. 2. Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA. 3. University of Iowa College of Nursing, Iowa City, IA, USA. 4. University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia. 5. Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA. 6. Johns Hopkins University School of Nursing, Baltimore, MD 21205, USA; Johns Hopkins University School of Medicine, Baltimore, MD, USA; Johns Hopkins University Bloomberg School of Public Health, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Individuals living with heart failure often require informal caregiving assistance for optimal self-care maintenance. The influence of caregiver burden and resilience on dyadic congruence is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To compare how dyadic congruence is influenced by level of burden and resilience expressed by caregivers of patients with heart failure. METHODS: Mixed-methods analysis of individuals with heart failure and their caregivers, focusing on measures of caregiver burden (Zarit Burden Interview) and resilience (Brief Resilience Scale). Data were integrated using the Heart Failure Care Dyadic Typology. RESULTS: Twelve dyads (n=24 participants) were classified as Type II (n=7) and Type III (n=5) dyads. Among Type II dyads, average caregiver burden was 19.43 (± 13.89) and resilience was 3.16 (± 1.04). For Type III dyads, average caregiver burden was 3.80 (± 4.27) and resilience 4.07 (± 1.36), respectively. Two key themes were derived: 1) caregivers' tendency to take the lead, and 2) the usefulness of cognitive reframing. Data integration elucidated that theme 1 was more common among Type II dyads and those with higher burden, and theme 2 was more prevalent among Type III dyads and those with higher resilience. CONCLUSION: Findings highlight important variances in how dyads collectively manage heart failure. Future inquiry should involve tailored intervention development to bolster informal caregivers' quality of life and ability to better support patients throughout their heart failure trajectory.
BACKGROUND: Individuals living with heart failure often require informal caregiving assistance for optimal self-care maintenance. The influence of caregiver burden and resilience on dyadic congruence is not well understood. OBJECTIVE: To compare how dyadic congruence is influenced by level of burden and resilience expressed by caregivers of patients with heart failure. METHODS: Mixed-methods analysis of individuals with heart failure and their caregivers, focusing on measures of caregiver burden (Zarit Burden Interview) and resilience (Brief Resilience Scale). Data were integrated using the Heart Failure Care Dyadic Typology. RESULTS: Twelve dyads (n=24 participants) were classified as Type II (n=7) and Type III (n=5) dyads. Among Type II dyads, average caregiver burden was 19.43 (± 13.89) and resilience was 3.16 (± 1.04). For Type III dyads, average caregiver burden was 3.80 (± 4.27) and resilience 4.07 (± 1.36), respectively. Two key themes were derived: 1) caregivers' tendency to take the lead, and 2) the usefulness of cognitive reframing. Data integration elucidated that theme 1 was more common among Type II dyads and those with higher burden, and theme 2 was more prevalent among Type III dyads and those with higher resilience. CONCLUSION: Findings highlight important variances in how dyads collectively manage heart failure. Future inquiry should involve tailored intervention development to bolster informal caregivers' quality of life and ability to better support patients throughout their heart failure trajectory.
Authors: Joban Vaishnav; Abby Hubbard; Jessica E Chasler; Diane Lepley; Kimberly Cuomo; Sarah Riley; Kathryn Menzel; Johana Fajardo; Kavita Sharma; Daniel P Judge; Stuart D Russell; Nisha A Gilotra Journal: Am Heart J Date: 2020-12-22 Impact factor: 4.749
Authors: Lisa Kitko; Colleen K McIlvennan; Julie T Bidwell; J Nicholas Dionne-Odom; Shannon M Dunlay; Lisa M Lewis; Ginny Meadows; Elisabeth L P Sattler; Richard Schulz; Anna Strömberg Journal: Circulation Date: 2020-04-30 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Carolina Palacio G; Alicia Krikorian; María José Gómez-Romero; Joaquín T Limonero Journal: Am J Hosp Palliat Care Date: 2019-12-13 Impact factor: 2.500