Resilience among caregivers of patients with heart failure: a convergent mixed methods study
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Abstract Funding Acknowledgements Type of funding sources: Private grant(s) and/or Sponsorship. Main funding source(s): HFA Nurse training Fellowship Award Center for Excellence for Culture and Nursing Research (CECRI)Nursing Scholarship OPI Rome Italy Introduction Resilience is a dynamic process of utilising abilities to harness personal, social, and spiritual resources and coping characteristics and developing regulatory flexibility to manage challenges and bounce back from emotional and physical distress. Caregivers of patients with heart failure are prone to increased stress and reduced resilience while assisting their family members in meeting self-care needs, activities of daily living, and complex medical and dietary regimens. To date, limited research exists on resilience and its predictors among caregivers of people with heart failure. Purpose To develop a comprehensive understanding of resilience and its predictors among caregivers of patients with heart failure. Methods A convergent mixed methods design was used. In total, 50 caregivers completed the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale (CDRS) (score range: 0–100, with higher scores indicating higher resilience), the Caregiver Burden Inventory (CBI) (higher scores indicate greater caregiver burden; there are no cut-off points for classifying burden), and the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) (two subscales, range score 0 and 21 per each subscale; higher scores mean worse anxiety and depression) and participated in semi-structured face-to-face interviews. Data were analysed using multiple regression, qualitative content analysis, and joint displays. Results The caregivers’ mean age was 62.8 ± 12.83 years. The CDRS mean score was 62.37 ± 24.2, and the mean HADS scores for anxiety and depression were 12.38 ± 2.74 and 8.54 ± 2.49, respectively. The mean CBI score was 16.82 ± 17.12. Regression analysis showed that the resilience score was only predicted by depression (B = -1.491, p = 0.031). Qualitative analysis generated three resilience-inhibiting factors (psychological outlook, physical weariness, and affective state) and two promoting factors (community interconnectedness and self-comforting activities). Mixed analysis confirmed that depression decreased caregivers’ resilience. Conclusions Caregivers of people with heart failure are likely to experience extreme stress and anxiety that affect their resilience to provide better care for their family members. This study identified that depression, hopelessness, pessimism, powerlessness, physical fatigue, and fluctuating emotional states affected negatively caregivers’ resilience. However, self-comforting activities and community interconnectedness improved caregivers’ resilience. Community care organizations and hospitals could establish alliances to develop programs for enhancing caregivers’ resilience.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,003 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».