Predictors of the personal benefits and positive aspects of informal caregiving

Abstract

Objective: We investigated a) the number of reported benefits in an informal caregiving situation and b) the factors that predict the caregiver’s (CG’s) experience of benefits.

Method: In this cross-sectional study, we computed univariate analyses and a multiple regression analysis using a benefit score as the dependent variable. Participants were 734 informal CGs who provide care for a person with chronic care needs in Germany. We examined the CG’s self-reported physical complaints (GBB-24), subjective burden (CSI), depressive symptoms (PHQ-9), quality of life (CarerQoL), and benefits (BIZA-D).

Results: Most of the CGs (87.1%) experienced benefits in at least one field. A higher experience of benefits was significantly associated with: more depressive symptoms (r = 0.10), higher burden (r = 0.17), longer duration of care (r = 0.07), longer daily care time (r = 0.21), more physical complaints (r = 0.15), and a good quality of the relationship between CG and CR (η = 0.13). In the multivariate regression analysis, a good relationship between the CG and CR (β = .157, P < .001), an increased amount of care time (β = .188, P < .001), and a higher level of burden (β = .167, P < .001) were associated with greater CG’s benefits.

Conclusion: CG benefits are a very important, often experienced, but less-explored construct in caregiving research. Benefits do not seem to be on the opposite end of the same continuum as negative aspects of caregiving. Benefits appear to be a nearly distinct dimension in informal care settings.

Keywords:

• Benefits
• caregiver burden
• informal caregivers
• positive aspects of caregiving
• quality of the relationship

Acknowledgments

The authors would like to thank Uta Graf for the data acquisition. We would also like to thank our English language editor, Dr. Jane Zagorski.

Disclosure of interest

The authors report no conflicts of interest.

Additional information

Funding

No funds were received for this research.

Notes on contributors

Anna Pendergrass

EG: study concept and design. AP, NK: data analysis. EG, AP, NK: data interpretation and preparation of manuscript. MM, DÖ: revision of manuscript. The present work was performed in patial fulfillment of the requirements for obtaining the degree ‘Dr. rer. biol. hum.’ by NK.

Mary Mittelman

EG: study concept and design. AP, NK: data analysis. EG, AP, NK: data interpretation and preparation of manuscript. MM, DÖ: revision of manuscript. The present work was performed in patial fulfillment of the requirements for obtaining the degree ‘Dr. rer. biol. hum.’ by NK.

Elmar Graessel

EG: study concept and design. AP, NK: data analysis. EG, AP, NK: data interpretation and preparation of manuscript. MM, DÖ: revision of manuscript. The present work was performed in patial fulfillment of the requirements for obtaining the degree ‘Dr. rer. biol. hum.’ by NK.

Dominik Özbe

EG: study concept and design. AP, NK: data analysis. EG, AP, NK: data interpretation and preparation of manuscript. MM, DÖ: revision of manuscript. The present work was performed in patial fulfillment of the requirements for obtaining the degree ‘Dr. rer. biol. hum.’ by NK.

Nina Karg

EG: study concept and design. AP, NK: data analysis. EG, AP, NK: data interpretation and preparation of manuscript. MM, DÖ: revision of manuscript. The present work was performed in patial fulfillment of the requirements for obtaining the degree ‘Dr. rer. biol. hum.’ by NK.