Original article
Role of Social Support in Predicting Caregiver Burden

Presented in part as a short oral presentation to the American Spinal Injury Association, April 19, 2012, Denver, CO.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmr.2012.07.004Get rights and content

Abstract

Rodakowski J, Skidmore ER, Rogers JC, Schulz R. Role of social support in predicting caregiver burden.

Objective

To examine the unique contribution of social support to burden in caregivers of adults aging with spinal cord injury (SCI).

Design

Secondary analyses of cross-sectional data from a large cohort of adults aging with SCI and their primary caregivers.

Setting

Multiple community locations.

Participants

Caregivers of community-dwelling adults aging with SCI (n=173) were interviewed as part of a multisite randomized controlled trial. The mean age ± SD of caregivers was 53±15 years and of care-recipients, 55±13 years.

Interventions

Not applicable.

Main Outcome Measures

The primary outcome was caregiver burden measured with the Abridged Version of the Zarit Burden Interview. A hierarchical multiple regression analysis examined the effects of social supports (social integration, received social support, and negative social interactions) on burden in caregivers of adults aging with SCI while controlling for demographic characteristics and caregiving characteristics.

Results

After controlling for demographic characteristics and caregiving characteristics, social integration (β̂=−.16, P<.05), received social support (β̂=−.15, P<.05), and negative social interactions (β̂=.21, P<.01) were significant independent predictors of caregiver burden.

Conclusions

Findings demonstrate that social support is an important factor associated with burden in caregivers of adults aging with SCI. Social support should be considered for assessments and interventions designed to identify and reduce caregiver burden.

Section snippets

Methods

We conducted a secondary analysis of data from a multisite randomized controlled trial testing a caregiver and care-recipient dyadic intervention.29 We used cross-sectional baseline data for the current study analyses. Dyads were recruited from community locations in Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, and Miami, Florida. Outreach efforts were extensive, including radio and television announcements, newspaper articles and advertisements, newsletter articles, and community presentations. Both sites

Results

In the parent study, 459 caregivers were screened, 262 were not eligible, and 24 eligible caregivers refused participation, indicating that they were not interested in study participation or were too busy. Baseline assessment was completed by 173 caregivers.

Most of the caregivers were women (75.8%, n=131), white (74.0%, n=128), employed (50.2%, n=87), went to school beyond high school (68.2%, n=118), and were spouses to the individual with the SCI (69.3%, n=120). Their mean age ± SD was 53±15

Discussion

Our primary focus was to examine the contribution that social support makes to burden in caregivers of adults aging with SCI, as social support is associated with health and burden.20, 21, 22, 25, 27 Considering the number of factors that could predict burden, social support contributed meaningfully to the variance in burden.39 We discovered that higher levels of social integration and received social support were associated with lower burden in caregivers of adults aging with SCI, affirming

Conclusions

In summary, caregiver's perceived health status, residential status, employment outside the home, perceived positive aspects of caregiving, care-recipient functional status (ADL and IADL status), in-home support services, and social support appear to strongly influence caregiver burden. Negative social interactions, among social support, most strongly predicted burden. With knowledge of these predictors, further examination of their impact on caregivers of adults aging with SCI may be useful

Acknowledgment

We thank Sara Czaja, PhD, at the University of Miami Miller School of Medicine who contributed to the development and implementation of the parent-study.

References (46)

  • S.K. Roepke et al.

    Effects of Alzheimer caregiving on allostatic load

    J Health Psychol

    (2011)
  • S.H. Croog et al.

    Spouse caregivers of Alzheimer patients: problem responses to caregiver burden

    Aging Ment Health

    (2006)
  • R. Schulz et al.

    Caregiving as a risk factor for mortality: the Caregiver Health Effects Study

    JAMA

    (1999)
  • D.E. Biegel et al.

    Family caregiving in chronic illness: Alzheimer's disease, cancer, heart disease, mental illness, and stroke

    (1991)
  • R.V. Montgomery et al.

    Measurement and the analysis of burden

    Res Aging

    (1985)
  • R. Schulz et al.

    The social psychology of caregiving: physical and psychological costs to providing support to the disabled

    J Appl Soc Psychol

    (1987)
  • H. Kim et al.

    Predictors of caregiver burden in caregivers of individuals with dementia

    J Adv Nurs

    (2012)
  • S.H. Belle et al.

    Enhancing the quality of life of dementia caregivers from different ethnic or racial groups: a randomized, controlled trial

    Ann Intern Med

    (2006)
  • M.W. Post et al.

    Burden of support for partners of persons with spinal cord injuries

    Spinal Cord

    (2005)
  • A. Dickson et al.

    Adjustment and coping in spousal caregivers following a traumatic spinal cord injury: an interpretative phenomenological analysis

    J Health Psychol

    (2012)
  • L.I. Pearlin et al.

    Caregiving and the stress process: an overview of concepts and their measures

    Gerontologist

    (1990)
  • S. Cohen et al.

    Social ties and susceptibility to the common cold

    JAMA

    (1997)
  • Cited by (0)

    Supported by the National Center for Medical Rehabilitation Research (grant nos. T32 HD049307, K12 HD055931) and the National Institute of Nursing Research (grant no. 1R01 NR008272).

    No commercial party having a direct financial interest in the results of the research supporting this article has or will confer a benefit on the authors or on any organization with which the authors are associated.

    In-press corrected proof published online on Sep 14, 2012, at www.archives-pmr.org.

    View full text