Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Longitudinal predictors of informal and formal caregiving time in community-dwelling dementia patients

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
Social Psychiatry and Psychiatric Epidemiology Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Purpose

Care provided in the community for dementia patients on an individual basis may be very time consuming. Yet, little is known about the factors affecting caregiving time for community-dwelling dementia patients. Thus, we aimed to investigate the predictors of informal and formal caregiving time for these patients in a longitudinal approach.

Method

Caregiving time for n = 126 community-dwelling dementia patients was assessed by proxy interviews in four assessments at 6-month intervals (1.5 years of longitudinal follow-up; AgeCoDe study). Measurement of informal caregiving time was based on a German adaptation of the Resource Utilization in Dementia questionnaire. Dementia severity was measured by the Clinical Dementia Rating (CDR). We used random effects models to estimate the effects of sociodemographic variables (age, gender, marital status and education), comorbidity and dementia severity on informal and formal caregiving time.

Results

At the first assessment, mean age was 85.0 years (±3.2 years). The majority of patients was female (65.9 %), not married (divorced, single, widowed: 55.6 %) and had primary education (63.5 %). Furthermore, mean GDS was 4.4 (±0.8) and mean MMSE was 20.1 (±5.1). According to CDR, 43 individuals had very mild dementia, 55 individuals had mild dementia and 28 individuals had moderate/severe dementia. Moreover, mean total caregiving time was 3.4 h per day (±4.0). Thereof the main part represents informal caregiving time (2.3 h ± 3.4), whereas formal caregiving time was 1.2 h (±2.4). Dementia severity was associated with total caregiving time, mainly influenced by informal caregiving time. Age was positively associated with total caregiving time, driven by formal caregiving time, while being married was positively associated with total caregiving time, mainly affected by informal caregiving time. All need categories of informal caregiving time were strongly related to dementia severity, whereas none of the categories of formal caregiving time were related to dementia severity.

Conclusions

Our findings extend previous studies that found an association between informal caregiving time and dementia severity. Moreover, our findings highlight the role of informal care for community-dwelling dementia patients in Germany. Informal caregiving time strongly increases with dementia severity. Consequently, as the number of patients suffering from dementia is expected to increase considerably in the next decades, there is a paramount need to strengthen the informal care system to meet patients’ needs.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Bickel H (2005) Epidemiologie und Gesundheitsökonomie [Epidemiology and Health Economics]. Thieme Verlag, Stuttgart, pp 1–15

    Google Scholar 

  2. Goldsmith M (1996) Hearing the voice of people with dementia: opportunities and obstacles. Readers Digest

  3. Wiles JL, Leibing A, Guberman N et al (2012) (52) The meaning of “aging in place” to older people. Gerontologist 3:357–366. doi:10.1093/geront/gnr098

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Federal Ministry of Justice (1994) Social code book XI. Federal Ministry of Justice, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  5. Jakobsen M, Poulsen PB, Reiche T et al (2011) Costs of informal care for people suffering from dementia: evidence from a Danish survey. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord Extra 1(1):418–428

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Bakker C, de Vugt Marjolein E, van Vliet D et al (2013) The use of formal and informal care in early onset dementia: results from the NeedYD study. Am J Geriatr Psychiatry 21(1):37–45

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Zhu CW, Scarmeas N, Torgan R et al (2006) Clinical characteristics and longitudinal changes of informal cost of Alzheimer’s disease in the community. J Am Geriatr Soc 54(10):1596–1602

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  8. Leicht H, König H, Stuhldreher N et al (2013) Predictors of costs in dementia in a longitudinal perspective. PLoS One 8(7):e70018

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  9. Zhu CW, Leibman C, McLaughlin T et al (2008) Patient dependence and longitudinal changes in costs of care in Alzheimer’s disease. Dement Geriatr Cogn Disord Extra 26(5):416–423

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Folstein MF, Folstein SE, McHugh PR (1975) Mini-mental state: a practical method for grading the cognitive state of patients for the clinician. J Psychiatr Res 12(3):189–198

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Blessed G, Tomlinson BE, Roth M (1968) The association between quantitative measures of dementia and of senile change in the cerebral grey matter of elderly subjects. Br J Psychiatry 114(512):797–811

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Luck T, Riedel-Heller SG, Luppa M et al (2010) Risk factors for incident mild cognitive impairment—results from the German Study on Ageing, Cognition and Dementia in Primary Care Patients (AgeCoDe). Acta Psychiatr Scand 121(4):260–272

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  13. Zaudig M, Mittelhammer J, Hiller W et al (1991) SIDAM: a structured interview for the diagnosis of dementia of the Alzheimer type, multi-infarct dementia and dementias of other aetiology according to ICD-10 and DSM-III-R. Psychol Med 21(01):225–236

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  14. Morris JC (1993) The clinical dementia rating (CDR): current version and scoring rules. Neurology 43(11):2412–2414

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  15. Reisberg B, Ferris SH, de Leon Mony J et al (1982) The Global Deterioration Scale for assessment of primary degenerative dementia. Am J Psychiatry 139(9):1136–1139

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  16. Mahoney FI (1965) Functional evaluation: the Barthel index. Maryland State Med J 14:61–65

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Lawton MP, Brody EM (1969) Assessment of older people: self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living. Gerontologist 9(3 Part 1):179–186

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. Morris JC (1997) Clinical dementia rating: a reliable and valid diagnostic and staging measure for dementia of the Alzheimer type. Int Psychogeriatr 9(S1):173–176

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Rikkert MG, Tona KD, Janssen L et al (2011) Validity, reliability, and feasibility of clinical staging scales in dementia: a systematic review. Am J Alzheimer’s Dis Other Dement 26(5):357

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Foster JR, Sclan S, Welkowitz J et al (1988) Psychiatric assessment in medical long-term care facilities: reliability of commonly used rating scales. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 3(3):229–233

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Hartmaier SL, Sloane PD, Guess HA et al (1994) The MDS Cognition Scale: a valid instrument for identifying and staging nursing home residents with dementia using the minimum data set. J Am Geriatr Soc 42(11):1173–1179

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Neubauer S, Holle R, Menn P et al (2009) A valid instrument for measuring informal care time for people with dementia. Int J Geriatr Psychiatry 24(3):275–282

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  23. Wimo A, Nordberg G (2007) Validity and reliability of assessments of time: comparisons of direct observations and estimates of time by the use of the resource utilization in dementia (RUD)-instrument. Arch Gerontol Geriatr 44(1):71–81

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  24. Wimo A, Jonsson L, Zbrozek A (2010) The Resource Utilization in Dementia (RUD) instrument is valid for assessing informal care time in community-living patients with dementia. J Nutr Health Aging 14(8):685–690

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. Cameron AC, Trivedi PK (2005) Microeconometrics: methods and applications. Cambridge University Press, New York

    Book  Google Scholar 

  26. Rothgang H, Müller R, Unger R (2013) Schwerpunktthema: Reha bei Pflege [Barmer GEK Care report 2013]. Asgard-Verl.-Service, Siegburg

    Google Scholar 

  27. Elwert F, Winship C (2014) Endogenous selection bias: the problem of conditioning on a collider variable. Annu Rev Sociol 40:31–53

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Statistisches Bundesamt [Federal Statistical Office] (2009) Bevölkerung Deutschlands bis 2060. 12. koordinierte Bevölkerungsvorausberechnung [Germany’s Population by 2060. Results of the 12th Coordinated Population Projection]

  29. Statistisches Bundesamt [Federal Statistical Office] (2011) Bevölkerung und Erwerbstätigkeit. Entwicklung der Privathaushalte bis 2030. Ergebnisse der Haushaltsvorausberechnung [Population and employment. Development of private households until 2030. Results of household projections]

Download references

Acknowledgments

The authors thank two anonymous reviewers who provided insightful comments to strengthen the manuscript. Moreover, we want to thank all participating patients and their general practitioners for their good collaboration. This publication is part of the German Research Network on Dementia (KND), the German Research Network on Degenerative Dementia (KNDD), and the Study on Needs, Health Service Use, Costs and Health-related Quality of Life in a large Sample of Oldest-old Primary Care Patients (85+) (AgeQualiDe) and was funded by the German Federal Ministry of Education and Research (Grants KND 01GI0102, 01GI0420, 01GI0422, 01GI0423, 01GI0429, 01GI0431, 01GI0433 and 01GI0434; Grants KNDD 01GI0710, 01GI0711, 01GI0712, 01GI0713, 01GI0714, 01GI0715, 01GI0716 and 01ET1006B; and Grants AgeQualiDe 01GY1322A, 01GY1322B, 01GY1322C, 01GY1322D, 01GY1322E, 01GY1322F, 01GY1322G).

Members of the AgeCoDe Study Group

Principal Investigators [Hendrik van den Bussche (2002–2011)]: Wolfgang Maier, Martin Scherer.

Heinz-Harald Abholz, Cadja Bachmann, Horst Bickel, Wolfgang Blank, Hendrik van den Bussche, Sandra Eifflaender-Gorfer, Marion Eisele, Annette Ernst, Angela Fuchs, Kathrin Heser, Frank Jessen, Hanna Kaduszkiewicz, Teresa Kaufeler, Mirjam Köhler, Hans-Helmut König, Alexander Koppara, Carolin Lange, Hanna Leicht, Tobias Luck, Melanie Luppa, Manfred Mayer, Edelgard Mösch, Julia Olbrich, Michael Pentzek, Jana Prokein, Anna Schumacher, Steffi Riedel-Heller, Janine Stein, Susanne Steinmann, Franziska Tebarth, Michael Wagner, Klaus Weckbecker, Dagmar Weeg, Jochen Werle, Siegfried Weyerer, Birgitt Wiese, Steffen Wolfsgruber, Thomas Zimmermann.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Health Economics and Health Services Research, Hamburg Center for Health Economics, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany

    André Hajek, Christian Brettschneider & Hans-Helmut König

  2. Department of Primary Medical Care, Center for Psychosocial Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Hamburg, Germany

    Annette Ernst, Tina Posselt & Martin Scherer

  3. Institute of General Practice, Hannover Medical School, Hannover, Germany

    Birgitt Wiese & Jana Prokein

  4. Central Institute of Mental Health, Medical Faculty Mannheim, Heidelberg University, Mannheim, Germany

    Siegfried Weyerer & Jochen Werle

  5. Institute of General Practice, Medical Faculty, Heinrich-Heine-University Düsseldorf, Düsseldorf, Germany

    Angela Fuchs & Michael Pentzek

  6. Institute of Social Medicine, Occupational Health and Public Health, University of Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany

    Janine Stein & Steffi G. Riedel-Heller

  7. Department of Psychiatry, Technical University of Munich, Munich, Germany

    Horst Bickel & Edelgard Mösch

  8. Department of Psychiatry, University of Bonn, Bonn, Germany

    Kathrin Heser & Wolfgang Maier

  9. Department of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy, University of Cologne, Cologne, Germany

    Frank Jessen

  10. German Center for Neurodegenerative Diseases (DZNE), Bonn, Germany

    Frank Jessen & Wolfgang Maier

Authors
  1. André Hajek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Christian Brettschneider
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Annette Ernst
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Tina Posselt
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Birgitt Wiese
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  6. Jana Prokein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  7. Siegfried Weyerer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  8. Jochen Werle
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  9. Angela Fuchs
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  10. Michael Pentzek
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  11. Janine Stein
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  12. Steffi G. Riedel-Heller
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  13. Horst Bickel
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  14. Edelgard Mösch
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  15. Kathrin Heser
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  16. Frank Jessen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  17. Wolfgang Maier
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  18. Martin Scherer
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  19. Hans-Helmut König
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to André Hajek.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interests

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical statement

The ethics committees of the participating centers approved the study [reference numbers: 050/02 (University of Bonn), 2079 (Faculty of Medicine, University of Düsseldorf), 2817/2007 (Hamburg Medical Association), 309/2007 (Faculty of Medicine, University of Leipzig), 2007-253E-MA (Medical Ethics Commission II, University of Heidelberg at the University Medical Center of Mannheim), 713/02 (Faculty of Medicine, Technical University of Munich)]. The study was conducted according to the principles expressed in the Declaration of Helsinki. All participants gave written informed consent prior to study entry.

Additional information

For the AgeCoDe Study Group.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Hajek, A., Brettschneider, C., Ernst, A. et al. Longitudinal predictors of informal and formal caregiving time in community-dwelling dementia patients. Soc Psychiatry Psychiatr Epidemiol 51, 607–616 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-015-1138-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00127-015-1138-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation