↓ Skip to main content

Psychological status and quality of life among primary caregivers of individuals with mental illness: a hospital based study

Overview of attention for article published in Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, May 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 tweeter
facebook
1 Facebook page
reddit
1 Redditor

Citations

dimensions_citation
22 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
219 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Psychological status and quality of life among primary caregivers of individuals with mental illness: a hospital based study
Published in
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes, May 2017
DOI 10.1186/s12955-017-0676-y
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anitha Jeyagurunathan, Vathsala Sagayadevan, Edimansyah Abdin, YunJue Zhang, Sherilyn Chang, Saleha Shafie, Restria Fauziana Abdul Rahman, Janhavi Ajit Vaingankar, Siow Ann Chong, Mythily Subramaniam

Abstract

This study aimed to explore the psychological status and quality of life among primary caregivers of individuals suffering from various mental illnesses including early psychosis, chronic schizophrenia, depressive disorders, anxiety disorders and dementia. A total of 350 primary caregivers with relatives seeking treatment at a tertiary psychiatric hospital were recruited for this study. Socio-demographic data was obtained and the brief version of the World Health Organisation Quality of Life instrument was used to assess caregiver's quality of life (QOL). Psychological status among primary caregivers was assessed using the General Anxiety Disorder - 7 item (GAD-7) and Patient Health Questionnaire - 9 item (PHQ-9) scales. Family Interview Schedule (FIS) was used to assess the impact of caregiving relating to social problems, interpersonal strain among family members, work related problems and financial difficulties as a result of their relative's illness. The socio-demographic and clinical correlates of QOL, PHQ-9 and GAD-7 were examined using multiple linear and logistic regression analyses. Associations between QOL domains and psychological status was examined using multiple linear regression analyses. The mean age of the primary caregivers was 49.7 years (SD = 13.2), ranging from 21 to 82 years, with a preponderance of females (67.6%), aged 50-64 years old (45.7%). Majority were of Chinese ethnicity (57.5%), had secondary level education (43.1%), were married (65.2%), and employed (64.9%). 18.3% of primary caregivers had symptoms of depression (based on PHQ-9 cut-off point of 10 or greater) while 12.7% had symptoms of anxiety (based on GAD-7 cut-off point of 10 or greater). Multiple linear and logistic regression analyses revealed that primary caregivers aged between 35-49 years and 50-64 years, unemployed, living with others, providing care to those diagnosed with dementia and who had higher FIS scores were significantly more likely to report symptoms of depression whilst those who cared for their son/daughter were less likely to be associated with symptoms of depression. Primary caregivers who had lower education, were living with others, were single or divorced/separated, were unemployed and with higher FIS scores were associated with lower QOL domain scores. Those with symptoms of depression were significantly associated with low QOL across all four domains, whilst those with symptoms of anxiety were significantly associated with low QOL in the social relationships domain. Psychological status of caregivers in the current study was associated with the various domains of QOL. In particular, caregivers' symptoms of depression were significantly associated with lower QOL across all four domains of QOL whereas symptoms of anxiety were associated with lower scores in the social relationships domain. The study suggests a need to provide caregivers with social support and psycho-education to improve the QOL as well as aid in developing healthy coping strategies.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 tweeter who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 219 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 219 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 38 17%
Student > Bachelor 28 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 27 12%
Researcher 20 9%
Student > Doctoral Student 12 5%
Other 37 17%
Unknown 57 26%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Nursing and Health Professions 46 21%
Psychology 43 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 31 14%
Social Sciences 13 6%
Business, Management and Accounting 3 1%
Other 18 8%
Unknown 65 30%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 20 May 2017.
All research outputs
#11,778,596
of 15,442,255 outputs
Outputs from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1,044
of 1,660 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#180,935
of 268,949 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
#1
of 1 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 15,442,255 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 20th percentile – i.e., 20% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,660 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.0. This one is in the 31st percentile – i.e., 31% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 268,949 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 27th percentile – i.e., 27% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than all of them