34 Specific Agitation Behaviors in Dementia Differentially Contribute to Caregiver Burden
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Objective: Agitation is a common neuropsychiatric symptom within the dementia spectrum, experienced by 70 percent of individuals with cognitive decline. Prior literature demonstrates a strong association between care recipient agitation and burden in caregivers of individuals with dementia, as these symptoms are often difficult to manage and predict. Understanding how agitation symptoms in the person with dementia may influence caregiver burden is imperative given these strong associations; however, both agitation and burden are complex, multidimensional constructs. Agitation in dementia involves a range of behaviors including increased motor activity, emotional distress, and aggressive behaviors. Caregiver burden is also multi-faceted and often incorporates dimensions of social/relationship, emotional, and physical health strain. The current study sought to determine whether specific presentations of agitation differentially relate to distinct patterns of caregiver burden. Participants and Methods: Medical record data from an outpatient memory clinic were extracted for 609 persons with dementia and their caregivers. Caregivers completed the Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) to assess caregiver burden and the Cohen-Mansfield Agitation Inventory (CMAI) to assess care recipient agitation behaviors. At their initial outpatient appointment, care recipients were also administered a measure of global cognitive functioning (either the Montreal Cognitive Assessment or the Mini-Mental State Examination). Demographic information was extracted from medical records. Exploratory factor analysis was used to determine ZBI and CMAI factor structures. Hierarchical multiple regression analyses then examined whether factors of the CMAI differentially predicted ZBI factors, controlling for dementia severity and demographic variables. Results: Exploratory factor analysis yielded three domains of agitation on the CMAI ("Physically Aggressive," "Physically NonAggressive," "Verbally Agitated") and four domains of burden on the ZBI ("Impact on Life," "Guilt/Uncertainty," "Embarrassed/Frustrated," and "Overwhelm"). Regression analyses demonstrated all domains of agitation positively predicted overall burden. Regarding specific aspects of burden, Physically Aggressive behaviors predicted only Embarrassment/Frustration (B=.41, SE=.10, ß=.16, p<.001). Non-Aggressive behaviors predicted Impact on Life (B=.14, SE=.05, ß=.13, p<.01) and Guilt/Uncertainty (B=.05, SE=.02, ß=.10, p<.05). Verbally Agitated behaviors predicted all burden dimensions: Impact on Life (B=.35, SE=.06, ß=.32, p<.001), Guilt/Uncertainty (B=.12, SE=.03, ß=.22, p<.001), Embarrassment/Frustration (B=.17, SE=.02, ß=.38, p<.001), and Overwhelm (B=.16, SE=.02, ß=.40, p<.001). Conclusions: Findings enhance understanding of the relationships between specific agitation symptoms and distinctive aspects of caregiver burden, suggesting that targeted interventions for aspects of caregiver burden based on agitation symptoms may be useful in alleviating burden. Interventions focused on caregivers' feelings of guilt, personal health decline, lack of time for themselves, and fear and uncertainty about the future may be effective when care recipients present with physically nonaggressive behaviors (e.g., pacing, restlessness, inappropriate dress or disrobing). When a care recipient presents with physically aggressive behaviors, helping the caregiver cope with embarrassment or anger may be of benefit. When a care recipient presents with verbally agitated behaviors, interventions targeting burden globally may be most useful. Future work should seek to replicate the current findings and explore such interventions.
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 machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,001 | 0,009 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 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 source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), 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 ».