首页> 外文期刊>BMC Health Services Research >Screening for caregivers at risk: Extended validation of the short version of the Burden Scale for Family Caregivers (BSFC-s) with a valid classification system for caregivers caring for an older person at home
【24h】

Screening for caregivers at risk: Extended validation of the short version of the Burden Scale for Family Caregivers (BSFC-s) with a valid classification system for caregivers caring for an older person at home

机译:筛查风险的护理人员:延长验证家庭护理人员(BSFC-S)的短版本,为护理人员提供了有效的分类系统,为家庭提供了一个老年人

获取原文
       

摘要

Informal caregivers’ (CGs’) subjective burden is an important aspect of the care situation because it is linked to various outcomes such as health, mortality risk, institutionalization, and caregiving style. The aims of this study were a) to examine the convergent and discriminant validity of the 10-item short version of the Burden Scale for Family Caregivers (BSFC-s) and b) to develop a valid classification system for interpreting BSFC-s scores. In this cross-sectional study, we analyzed data obtained from 386 informal CGs who applied for an initial grade or upgrade of the care level for the care recipient at the Medical Service of Compulsory Health Insurance Funds of Bavaria (Germany). To validate the BSFC-s, we analyzed the reliability and the convergent/discriminant validity. We calculated correlations with the short form of the Giessen Symptom Complaints List (GBB-24), the Caregiver Strain Index (CSI), the personal further development sub-scale of the Berlin Inventory of Caregivers’ Burden with Dementia Patients (BIZA-D), and other scales for establishing informal CGs’ situations. To develop the classification system, we compared the percentile ranks of the GBB-24 with the respective BSFC-s sum scores and their distributions and derived three classification categories. Results confirmed the convergent and discriminant validity of the BSFC-s (GBB-24: r?=?0.68; CSI: r?=?0.70; BIZA-D: r?=?0.16; p?
机译:非正式护理人员(CGS')主观负担是护理局势的一个重要方面,因为它与健康,死亡风险,制度化和护理风格等各种结果相关联。本研究的目的是审查家庭护理人员(BSFC-S)和B)的10项简短版本的10项短版的会聚和判别有效性,以制定有效的分类系统,以解释BSFC-S分数。在这个横断面研究中,我们分析了从386个非正式CG获得的数据,申请了在巴伐利亚(德国)的强制健康保险基金的医疗服务处申请护理收件人的初始成绩或升级。为了验证BSFC-S,我们分析了可靠性和收敛/判别有效性。我们计算了与Giessen症状投诉名单(GBB-24),护理人员应变指数(CSI),柏林库存的个人进一步发展患者与痴呆症患者(Biza-D)的个人进一步发展亚规模的相关性的相关性以及用于建立非正式CGS情况的其他规模。要开发分类系统,我们将GBB-24的百分位数与相应的BSFC-S Sum分数及其分布进行了比较,并派生了三个分类类别。结果证实了BSFC-S的收敛和判别有效性(GBB-24:R?= 0.68; CSI:R?= 0.70; Biza-D:R?= 0.16; P?<0.001)。对于具有低主观负担的非正式CGS,物理心理抱怨的风险升高到低于平均水平(BSFC-S 0-4的分数)。在具有中等主观负担的人(BSFC-S分数为5-14分),风险升高。在具有高负担的人(BSFC-S分数为15-30分)中,风险基本上升高。 BSFC-S是测量非正式CGS中主观负担的有效规模。物理心理抱怨的风险是通过使用有效的分类系统来决定采取行动的必要性并提供干预措施的具体建议来确定身体上CG负担的影响。因此,BSFC-S应该作为医学背景中的筛选仪器和非正式CGS的咨询服务。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号