4
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
0 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: not found
      • Article: not found

      The family caregiver experience – examining the positive and negative aspects of compassion satisfaction and compassion fatigue as caregiving outcomes

      1 , 2 , 2
      Aging & Mental Health
      Informa UK Limited

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPubMed
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Caregiving results in both positive and negative outcomes for caregivers. The purpose of this study was to examine compassion fatigue and compassion satisfaction in family caregivers.

          Related collections

          Most cited references17

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Compassion fatigue: psychotherapists' chronic lack of self care.

          Psychotherapists who work with the chronic illness tend to disregard their own self-care needs when focusing on the needs of clients. The article discusses the concept of compassion fatigue, a form of caregiver burnout among psychotherapists and contrasts it with simple burnout and countertransference. It includes a multi-factor model of compassion fatigue that emphasizes the costs of caring, empathy, and emotional investment in helping the suffering. The model suggests that psychotherapists that limiting compassion stress, dealing with traumatic memories, and more effectively managing case loads are effective ways of avoiding compassion fatigue. The model also suggests that, to limit compassion stress, psychotherapists with chronic illness need to development methods for both enhancing satisfaction and learning to separate from the work emotionally and physically in order to feel renewed. A case study illustrates how to help someone with compassion fatigue. Copyright 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: found
            • Article: not found

            The cancer family caregiving experience: an updated and expanded conceptual model.

            The decade from 2000 to 2010 was an era of tremendous growth in family caregiving research specific to the cancer population. This research has implications for how cancer family caregiving is conceptualized, yet the most recent comprehensive model of cancer family caregiving was published ten years ago. Our objective was to develop an updated and expanded comprehensive model of the cancer family caregiving experience, derived from concepts and variables used in research during the past ten years. A conceptual model was developed based on cancer family caregiving research published from 2000 to 2010. Our updated and expanded model has three main elements: 1) the stress process, 2) contextual factors, and 3) the cancer trajectory. Emerging ways of conceptualizing the relationships between and within model elements are addressed, as well as an emerging focus on caregiver-patient dyads as the unit of analysis. Cancer family caregiving research has grown dramatically since 2000 resulting in a greatly expanded conceptual landscape. This updated and expanded model of the cancer family caregiving experience synthesizes the conceptual implications of an international body of work and demonstrates tremendous progress in how cancer family caregiving research is conceptualized. Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              Assessing family caregiver's mental health using a statistically derived cut-off score for the Zarit Burden Interview.

              Decades of research have confirmed that being a family caregiver is a stressful role. However, the point at which these stressors constitute a real risk for decreased mental health has not been established. The purpose of the present study was to determine a statistically valid cut-off score for the Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) in order to identify family caregivers at risk for depression and in need of further assessment and intervention. The ZBI and the Geriatric Depression Scale or the CES-D were administered to three different populations of family caregivers of older adults: stroke caregivers (n=80), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) caregivers (n=48), and general disability caregivers (n=70). Using three different statistical methods, a ZBI cut-off score was determined. Next, contingency analysis was used to compare depression scale scores and ZBI cut-offs for the three groups of caregivers. Findings suggest that a cut-off score ranging from 24-26 has significant predictive validity for identifying caregivers at risk for depression. A ZBI cut-off of 24 correctly identified 72% of caregivers with probable depression. The validity of ZBI cut-offs scores warrants further confirmation with larger samples. Valid cut-off scores would enable health care providers to assess family caregivers at risk and provide necessary interventions to improve their quality of life in this important role.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Aging & Mental Health
                Aging & Mental Health
                Informa UK Limited
                1360-7863
                1364-6915
                August 16 2017
                November 02 2018
                August 16 2017
                November 02 2018
                : 22
                : 11
                : 1424-1431
                Affiliations
                [1 ] School of Nursing, University of North Carolina Charlotte, Charlotte, NC, USA
                [2 ] College of Nursing, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, USA
                Article
                10.1080/13607863.2017.1364344
                28812375
                8941c2a2-0481-475e-931c-5273b6d3dec9
                © 2018
                History

                Comments

                Comment on this article