| Literature DB >> 35627486 |
Wenqing Gao1,2, Shuailong Li1,2, Zhuoyuan Chi1,2, Fangfang Gong3, Wenxi Tang1,2.
Abstract
As China is transitioning to an aging society, the Chinese government has proposed an eldercare pattern, called medicalized elderly care, to help solve the rapid aging and health care problems together. However, the shortage of elderly caregivers is a critical issue, with deficiency both in quantity and quality. This study aims to survey nurses' willingness to transition into medicalized elderly caregivers and compare it between modern and traditional regions. Nurses working in Guangdong (modern region) and Jilin (traditional region) were investigated using a self-administered questionnaire in October 2021. We analyzed the influencing factors through χ²-test, t-test a and binary logistic regression model and further explored the influence of region using propensity score matching (PSM). A total of 1227 nurses were included, with 726 (59.2%) of them showing willingness to transition. Nurses from traditional regions showed a significantly higher willingness to transition after PSM (p = 0.027). Other factors influencing nurses' willingness were age, education, lived with older adults, participated in voluntary activities related to older adults, visited eldercare institutions, attitudes toward older adults, knowledge about older adults, hospice care attitudes and death attitudes. The willingness of nurses to transition was not high enough. To have more willing and skillful human resources for eldercare, we need a more "intimate society for older adults" in the first place.Entities:
Keywords: China; influencing factors; medicalized elder caregivers; nurses; transition willingness
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35627486 PMCID: PMC9141575 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19105950
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 4.614
Participants’ general information and willingness to transition into MEC givers.
| Variables | Cases (%) | Willingness (%) | χ² |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Region | 0.015 | 0.903 | ||
| Guangdong Province | 693 (56.5) | 409 (59.0) | ||
| Jilin Province | 534 (43.5) | 317 (59.4) | ||
| Gender | 0.100 | 0.752 | ||
| Male | 56 (4.6) | 32 (57.1) | ||
| Female | 1171 (95.4) | 694 (59.3) | ||
| Age | 13.127 |
| ||
| ≤30 | 388 (31.6) | 228 (58.8) | ||
| 31~39 | 514 (41.9) | 280 (54.5) | ||
| ≥40 | 325 (26.5) | 218 (67.1) | ||
| Education | 3.187 | 0.364 | ||
| Technical secondary school or below | 37 (3.0) | 27 (73.0) | ||
| Junior college | 286 (23.3) | 170 (59.4) | ||
| Bachelor’s degree | 877 (71.5) | 514 (58.6) | ||
| Master’s degree or above | 27 (2.2) | 15 (55.6) | ||
| Household registration | 0.098 | 0.755 | ||
| Urban areas | 591 (48.2) | 347 (58.7) | ||
| Rural areas | 636 (51.8) | 379 (59.6) | ||
| Religious belief | 0.023 | 0.879 | ||
| Yes | 117 (9.5) | 70 (59.8) | ||
| No | 1110 (90.5) | 656 (59.1) | ||
| Only child or not | 0.031 | 0.859 | ||
| Yes | 320 (26.1) | 188 (58.8) | ||
| No | 907 (73.9) | 538 (59.3) | ||
| Whether they lived with older people | 17.525 |
| ||
| Yes | 955 (77.8) | 595 (62.3) | ||
| No | 272 (22.2) | 131 (48.2) | ||
| Whether they had close contact with older adult relatives | 42.861 |
| ||
| Yes | 959 (78.2) | 614 (64.0) | ||
| No | 268 (21.8) | 112 (41.8) | ||
| Whether they participated in older adult-related voluntary activities | 75.246 |
| ||
| Yes | 498 (40.6) | 368 (73.9) | ||
| No | 729 (59.4) | 358 (49.1) | ||
| Whether they visited eldercare institutions such as nursing homes | 53.745 |
| ||
| Yes | 578 (47.1) | 405 (70.1) | ||
| No | 649 (52.9) | 321 (49.5) | ||
| Whether they knew the eldercare pattern of MEC | 15.904 |
| ||
| Yes | 902 (73.5) | 564 (62.5) | ||
| No | 325 (26.5) | 162 (49.8) | ||
| Whether they agreed to implement the MEC in China | 4.670 |
| ||
| Yes | 998 (81.3) | 605 (60.6) | ||
| No | 229 (18.7) | 121 (52.8) | ||
Comparison of attitude scale scores by willingness/unwillingness to transition into MEC givers.
| Variables | Willingness ( | Unwillingness ( | t |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| KAOPS score | 133.97 ± 18.34 | 123.36 ± 17.19 | 10.218 |
|
| FAQ score | 11.69 ± 3.10 | 10.58 ± 3.37 | 5.918 |
|
| FATCOD-B score | 97.90 ± 10.18 | 92.43 ± 7.34 | 10.321 |
|
| DAP-R scale | ||||
| Death fear DF | 20.10 ± 5.13 | 20.67 ± 4.91 | −1.963 | 0.05 |
| Death avoidance DA | 15.42 ± 3.89 | 15.56 ± 3.84 | −0.657 | 0.512 |
| Natural acceptance NA | 18.18 ± 3.47 | 17.98 ± 3.45 | 0.984 | 0.325 |
| Approach acceptance AA | 29.89 ± 7.02 | 29.44 ± 6.75 | 1.138 | 0.255 |
| Escape acceptance EA | 14.24 ± 4.08 | 14.65 ± 3.95 | −1.746 | 0.081 |
Binary logistic regression analysis of nurses’ willingness to transition.
| Variables | B | SE | Wald χ² |
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Region (Guangdong) | ||||
| Jilin | 0.444 | 0.332 | 0.637 |
|
| Age (≥40) | ||||
| ≤30 | −0.372 | 0.197 | 3.549 | 0.060 |
| 31~39 | −0.409 | 0.176 | 5.395 |
|
| Education (Master’s degree or above) | ||||
| Technical secondary school or below | 1.617 | 0.634 | 6.514 |
|
| Junior college | 0.892 | 0.503 | 3.147 | 0.076 |
| Bachelor’s degree | 0.756 | 0.487 | 2.406 | 0.121 |
| Whether they lived with older people (No) | ||||
| Yes | 0.476 | 0.170 | 7.833 |
|
| Whether they had close contact with older adult relatives (No) | ||||
| Yes | 0.434 | 0.167 | 6.797 |
|
| Whether they participated in voluntary activities related to older adults (No) | ||||
| Yes | 0.737 | 0.155 | 22.672 |
|
| Whether they visited eldercare institutions such as nursing homes (No) | ||||
| Yes | 0.408 | 0.148 | 7.602 |
|
| KAOPS score | 0.030 | 0.004 | 46.420 |
|
| FAQ score | 0.059 | 0.022 | 7.430 |
|
| FATCOD-B score | 0.064 | 0.010 | 45.197 |
|
| DAP-R scale | ||||
| Natural acceptance NA | 0.081 | 0.024 | 11.015 |
|
| Approach acceptance AA | 0.037 | 0.016 | 5.343 |
|
Comparison of willingness to transition in Guangdong and Jilin before and after matching.
| Variables | Before PSM |
| After PSM |
| ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Guangdong ( | Jilin ( | Guangdong ( | Jilin ( | |||
| Whether they had willingness to transition into caregivers | ||||||
| Yes | 409 | 317 | 0.006 | 190 | 218 |
|
| Gender | <0.001 | 0.247 | ||||
| Male | 45 | 11 | 17 | 11 | ||
| Female | 648 | 523 | 318 | 324 | ||
| Age | <0.001 |
| ||||
| ≤30 | 300 | 88 | 87 | 71 | ||
| 31~39 | 239 | 275 | 131 | 174 | ||
| ≥40 | 154 | 171 | 117 | 90 | ||
| Education | <0.001 |
| ||||
| Technical secondary school or below | 29 | 8 | 12 | 4 | ||
| Junior college | 182 | 104 | 64 | 73 | ||
| Bachelor’s degree | 460 | 417 | 245 | 255 | ||
| Master’s degree or above | 22 | 5 | 14 | 3 | ||
| Household registration | <0.001 | 0.487 | ||||
| Urban areas | 250 | 341 | 164 | 173 | ||
| Rural areas | 443 | 193 | 171 | 162 | ||
| Only child or not | <0.001 | 1.000 | ||||
| Yes | 89 | 231 | 82 | 82 | ||
| No | 604 | 303 | 253 | 253 | ||
| Whether they lived with older people | <0.001 | 0.644 | ||||
| Yes | 577 | 378 | 262 | 257 | ||
| No | 116 | 156 | 73 | 78 | ||
| Whether they participated in voluntary activities related to older adults | <0.001 | 0.752 | ||||
| Yes | 314 | 184 | 135 | 131 | ||
| No | 379 | 350 | 200 | 204 | ||
| Whether they visited eldercare institutions such as nursing homes | <0.001 | 0.877 | ||||
| Yes | 366 | 212 | 159 | 157 | ||
| No | 327 | 322 | 176 | 178 | ||
| Whether they knew the eldercare pattern of MEC | <0.001 | 0.605 | ||||
| Yes | 539 | 363 | 239 | 245 | ||
| No | 154 | 171 | 96 | 90 | ||
| KAOPS scale | 131.32 ± 17.70 | 127.45 ± 19.55 | <0.001 | 128.80 ± 17.05 | 128.32 ± 20.56 | 0.744 |
| FATCOD-B scale | 96.66 ± 9.56 | 94.38 ± 9.31 | <0.001 | 95.34 ± 9.37 | 95.52 ± 9.78 | 0.812 |
| DAP-R scale | ||||||
| Escape acceptance EA | 14.16 ± 3.92 | 14.72 ± 4.15 |
| 14.66 ± 3.96 | 14.66 ± 4.31 | 0.985 |