Family assistants’ living and working conditions and their interaction with patient and family caregiver variables A study protocol

Main Article Content

Silvio Simeone
Gianluca Pucciarelli
Elisa Dal Lago
Stefano Botti
Gianpaolo Gargiulo
Ercole Vellone
Rosaria Alvaro

Keywords

Family assistant, Home care workers, QoL, dyadic outcomes, living conditions, working conditions

Abstract

Background and aim: The progressive and constant aging of the global population together with the economy crises and the social variations within family contexts increasingly leads to the use of external resources (Home Care Workers, HCWs) for health care within one's own family of origin. Purpose of the study is to describe Italian Home Care Workers’ (HCWs) living and working conditions and understand the interactions with outcomes of the patients and informal caregiver.


Methods: Observational study with cross sectional design to evaluate the interaction of HCWs without specific training on patients and informal caregivers’ outcomes.


Results: understand Italian HCWs' condition and interaction between these conditions and outcomes of patients and informal caregiver.


Conclusions: understanding how HCWs’ conditions can affect outcome about patient and informal caregivers, represents a fundamental step in order to increase QoL of these families.

Abstract 290 | PDF Downloads 185

References

1. Vollset SE, Goren E, Yuan CW, et al. Fertility, mortality, migration, and population scenarios for 195 countries and territories from 2017 to 2100: a forecasting analysis for the Global Burden of Disease Study. Lancet (London, England). 2020 Oct 17;396(10258):1285-306.
2. Chang AY, Skirbekk VF, Tyrovolas S, Kassebaum NJ, Dieleman JL. Measuring population ageing: an analysis of the Global Burden of Disease Study 2017. Lancet Public health. 2019 Mar;4(3):e159-e67.
3. Smeets RGM, Kempen G, Zijlstra GAR, et al. Experiences of home-care workers with the 'Stay Active at Home' programme targeting reablement of community-living older adults: An exploratory study. Health Soc Care Community. 2020 Jan;28(1):291-9.
4. Landers S, Madigan E, Leff B, et al. The Future of Home Health Care: A Strategic Framework for Optimizing Value. Home Health Care Manag Pract. 2016 Nov;28(4):262-78.
5. Hanson GC, Perrin NA, Moss H, Laharnar N, Glass N. Workplace violence against homecare workers and its relationship with workers health outcomes: a cross-sectional study. BMC public health. 2015 Jan 17;15:11.
6. Nakaishi L, Moss H, Weinstein M, et al. Exploring workplace violence among home care workers in a consumer-driven home health care program. Workplace Health Saf. 2013 Oct;61(10):441-50.
7. Garcia-Perez L, Linertova R, Lorenzo-Riera A, Vazquez-Diaz JR, Duque-Gonzalez B, Sarria-Santamera A. Risk factors for hospital readmissions in elderly patients: a systematic review. QJM. 2011 Aug;104(8):639-51.
8. Olson R, Hess JA, Parker KN, et al. From Research-to-Practice: An Adaptation and Dissemination of the COMPASS Program for Home Care Workers. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Dec 7;15(12):2777.
9. Bilotta C, Nicolini P, Vergani C. Quality of private personal care for elderly people in Italy living at home with disabilities: risk of nursing home placement at a 1-year follow-up. Health Soc Care Community. 2009 Nov;17(6):543-7.
10. Bilotta C, Vergani C. Quality of private personal care for elderly people with a disability living at home: correlates and potential outcomes. Health Soc Care Community. 2008 Jul;16(4):354-62.
11. Chiatti C, Di Rosa M, Melchiorre MG, Manzoli L, Rimland JM, Lamura G. Migrant care workers as protective factor against caregiver burden: results from a longitudinal analysis of the EUROFAMCARE study in Italy. Aging Ment Health. 2013;17(5):609-14.
12. Chiatti C, Rodriguez Gatta D, Malmgren Fange A, et al. Utilization of Formal and Informal Care by Community-Living People with Dementia: A Comparative Study between Sweden and Italy. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2018 Nov 28;15(12):2679.
13. Scalmana S, Di Napoli A, Franco F, et al. Use of health and social care services in a cohort of Italian dementia patients. Funct Neurol. 2013 Oct-Dec;28(4):265-73.
14. Grabowski DC. The cost-effectiveness of noninstitutional long-term care services: review and synthesis of the most recent evidence. Med Care Res Rev. 2006 Feb;63(1):3-28.
15. Kim IH, Geiger-Brown J, Trinkoff A, Muntaner C. Physically demanding workloads and the risks of musculoskeletal disorders in homecare workers in the USA. Health Soc Care Community. 2010 Sep;18(5):445-55.
16. Delp L, Wallace SP, Geiger-Brown J, Muntaner C. Job stress and job satisfaction: home care workers in a consumer-directed model of care. Health Serv Res. 2010 Aug;45(4):922-40.
17. Grundberg A, Hansson A, Religa D, Hilleras P. Home care assistants' perspectives on detecting mental health problems and promoting mental health among community-dwelling seniors with multimorbidity. J Multidiscip Healthc. 2016;9:83-95.
18. Zoeckler JM. Occupational Stress Among Home Healthcare Workers: Integrating Worker and Agency-Level Factors. New Solut. 2018 Feb;27(4):524-42.
19. Robstad Andersen G, Westgaard RH. Perceived occupational exposures of home care workers and the association to general tension, shoulder-neck and low back pain. Work (Reading, Mass). 2014;49(4):723-33.
20. Harrad R, Sulla F. Factors associated with and impact of burnout in nursing and residential home care workers for the elderly. Acta Biomed. 2018 Dec 7;89(7-S):60-9.
21. Lyons KS, Lee CS. The Theory of Dyadic Illness Management. J Fam Nurs. 2018 Feb;24(1):8-28.
22. Pucciarelli G, Lyons KS, Simeone S, Lee CS, Vellone E, Alvaro R. Moderator Role of Mutuality on the Association Between Depression and Quality of Life in Stroke Survivor-Caregiver Dyads. J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2020 Jul 29.
23. Ware J, Jr., Kosinski M, Keller SD. A 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey: construction of scales and preliminary tests of reliability and validity. Med Care. 1996 Mar;34(3):220-33.
24. Kroenke K, Spitzer RL, Williams JB. The PHQ-9: validity of a brief depression severity measure. J Gen Intern Med. 2001 Sep;16(9):606-13.
25. Conti A, Clari M, Arese S, et al. Validation and psychometric evaluation of the Italian version of the Spinal Cord Injury Secondary Conditions Scale. Spinal Cord. 2020 Apr;58(4):496-503.
26. Novak M, Guest C. Application of a multidimensional caregiver burden inventory. Gerontologist. 1989 Dec;29(6):798-803.
27. Pucciarelli G, Ausili D, Galbussera AA,et al. Quality of life, anxiety, depression and burden among stroke caregivers: A longitudinal, observational multicentre study. J Adv Nurs. 2018 Apr 27.
28. Greco A, Pancani L, Sala M,et al. Psychometric characteristics of the caregiver burden inventory in caregivers of adults with heart failure. Eur J Cardiovasc Nurs. 2017 Aug;16(6):502-10.
29. Archbold PG, Stewart BJ, Greenlick MR, Harvath T. Mutuality and preparedness as predictors of caregiver role strain. Res Nurs Health. 1990 Dec;13(6):375-84.
30. Pucciarelli G, Savini S, Byun E, et al. Psychometric properties of the Caregiver Preparedness Scale in caregivers of stroke survivors. Heart Lung. 2014 Nov-Dec;43(6):555-60.
31. Petruzzo A, Paturzo M, Buck HG, et al. Psychometric evaluation of the Caregiver Preparedness Scale in caregivers of adults with heart failure. Res Nurs Health. 2017 Oct;40(5):470-8.
32. Siow JYM, Chan A, Ostbye T, Cheng GH, Malhotra R. Validity and Reliability of the Positive Aspects of Caregiving (PAC) Scale and Development of Its Shorter Version (S-PAC) Among Family Caregivers of Older Adults. Gerontologist. 2017 Aug 1;57(4):e75-e84.
33. Tarlow BJ, Wisniewski SR, Belle SH, Rubert M, Ory MG, Gallagher-Thompson D. Positive aspects of caregiving: Contributions of the REACH project to the development of new measures for Alzheimer's caregiving. Res Aging. 2004;26(4):429-53.
34. Devi F, Yuan Q, Wang P, et al. Positive aspect of caregiving among primary informal dementia caregivers in Singapore. PLoS One. 2020;15(8):e0237677.
35. De Maria M, Vellone E, Ausili D, et al. Self-care of patient and caregiver DyAds in multiple chronic conditions: A LongITudinal studY (SODALITY) protocol. J Adv Nurs. 2019 Feb;75(2):461-71.
36. Mahoney FI, Barthel DW. Functional Evaluation: The Barthel Index. Md State Med J. 1965 Feb;14:61-5.
37. Bouwstra H, Smit EB, Wattel EM, et al. Measurement Properties of the Barthel Index in Geriatric Rehabilitation. J Am Med Dir Assoc. 2019 Apr;20(4):420-5 e1.
38. Li F, Li D, Yu J, et al. Barthel Index as a Predictor of Mortality in Patients with Acute Coronary Syndrome: Better Activities of Daily Living, Better Prognosis. Clin Interv Aging. 2020;15:1951-61.
39. Wickham RE, Knee CR. Interdependence theory and the actor-partner interdependence model: where theory and method converge. Pers Soc Psychol Rev. 2012 Nov;16(4):375-93.
40. Baron RM, Kenny DA. The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986 Dec;51(6):1173-82.
41. Bilotta, C., Nicolini, P., & Vergani, C. (2011). One-year predictors of turnover among personal-care workers for older adults living at home in Italy. Ageing Soc, 31(4), 611–624.
42. Sterling MR, Silva AF, Leung PBK, et al "It's Like They Forget That the Word 'Health' Is in 'Home Health Aide'": Understanding the Perspectives of Home Care Workers Who Care for Adults With Heart Failure. J Am Heart Assoc. 2018 Dec 4;7(23):e010134.