Close

Chi-rectangular evaluating were utilized that have categorical variables; ANOVAs were used that have continuing variables

Chi-rectangular evaluating were utilized that have categorical variables; ANOVAs were used that have continuing variables

To analyze market, fitness condition, and you may comorbidity differences when considering schizophrenia caregivers, and you will non-caregiver control, and you will between schizophrenia caregivers, or other caregivers, bivariate analyses have been did.

Covariates detailed a lot more than (class and you may fitness characteristics) was in fact entered into the one logistic regression design in order to anticipate bringing proper care so you can a grownup diligent which have schizophrenia vs. maybe not providing care. Other separate logistic regression design try run to assume taking proper care so you can a grown-up patient with schizophrenia against. the individuals taking take care of people having an ailment other than schizophrenia. Schizophrenia caregivers have been coordinated in order to low-caregiver or any other caregiver participants for the propensity rating making use of the “greedy” complimentary algorithm . A 1:dos coordinating ratio was followed, per schizophrenia caregiver is actually coordinated in order to one or two low-caregiver handle respondents and separately so you’re able to a couple of caregivers off almost every other requirements. Post-matches, differences when considering this type of communities was re also-tested to ensure sufficient matching. In addition to, brand new matching is limited so that all matches was in fact in this for every 5EU country.

Differences on HRQoL, and self-reported comorbidities were examined post-matching to quantify the burden of schizophrenia caregiving as a function of humanistic outcomes. Chi-square and ANOVA tests were used to test for statistical differences across i) those providing care for an adult relative with schizophrenia vs. those not providing care for an adult relative and ii) those providing care for an adult relative with schizophrenia vs. those providing care for an adult relative with a condition other than schizophrenia. Statistical significance was set at 2-tailed p <0.05.

Abilities

All in all, 398 schizophrenia caregivers, 158,989 low-caregivers controls and fourteen,341 caregivers of most other conditions was indeed known thru 5EU NHWS across 2010, 2011 and you may 2013. Inside overall sample out of 173,728 adults across the 5EU, twenty-five.4 % was when you look at the France, 25.step three % inside the Germany, 25.6 % in the uk, fourteen.0 % for the Italy, and you can 9.six % in the The country of spain.

Schizophrenia caregivers vs. non-caregivers

The average age of schizophrenia caregivers was 45.3 years (SD = 15.8 years), 59.6 % were female, 52.5 % were currently employed, and 14.8 % reported an income of ? ˆ50,000/??40,000. Before matching, https://datingranking.net/elite-dating/ schizophrenia caregivers compared with non-caregivers, were more likely to be female (59.6 % vs. 51.4 %), less likely to be married/living with partner (57.4 % vs. 62.8 %), reported lower annual household income, were less likely to be employed (52.5 % vs. 57.7 %), more likely to currently smoke (36.7 % vs. 26.1 %), and reported greater comorbidity burden via the CCI, all p <0.05. No statistically significant differences on age, education level, BMI, alcohol use, and exercise behaviors were found between the two groups (see Table 1).

After propensity matching, schizophrenia caregivers were more likely to report experiencing sleep difficulties (42.7 % vs. 28.5 %), insomnia (32.4 % vs. 18.5 %), pain (39.7 % vs. 30.4 %), headaches (48.0 % vs. 42.0 %), heartburn (31.7 % vs. 22.9 %), anxiety (37.9 % vs. 23.6 %), and depression (29.4 % vs. 19.4 %) in the past 12 months than non-caregivers, all p <0.05. Based on the PHQ-9, schizophrenia caregivers reported greater severity of depressive symptoms than non-caregivers (p <0.001). Schizophrenia caregivers were also more likely to currently be using a prescription medication to treat depression (17.6 % vs. 8.2 %, p <0.001) than non-caregiver controls. Schizophrenia caregivers reported significantly lower MCS (40.3 vs. 45.9), PCS (46.8 vs. 49.0), and health utility (0.64 vs. 0.71), compared with non-caregivers (all p <0.001) (see Table 2).

Schizophrenia versus. other caregivers

Before propensity matching, schizophrenia caregivers compared with caregivers of other conditions, were younger (45.3 vs. 49.1 years), less likely to be married/living with a partner (57.4 % vs. 68.1 %), had lower annual household income, were more likely to currently smoke (36.7 % vs. 29.2 %), and reported greater comorbidity burden, all p <0.05. No statistically significant differences on gender, education level, employment status, BMI, alcohol use, and exercise behaviors were found between the two groups (see Table 3).

Добавить комментарий

Ваш e-mail не будет опубликован. Обязательные поля помечены *