4.7 Article

Work ability of informal caregivers of patients treated by the public home care service of Brazil: A cross-sectional study

期刊

SAFETY SCIENCE
卷 144, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.ssci.2021.105472

关键词

Caregivers; Home Care Services; Work capacity evaluation; Cross-sectional study; Quality of life; Occupational Health

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study evaluated the work ability of 70 informal caregivers in Brazil and found that factors such as quality of life and self-perceived physical fitness can improve work ability, while age, burden, and poor sleep quality may reduce work ability. Public health policies need to be developed to support informal caregivers who are often overlooked as workers.
Informal caregivers are subject to a heavy work burden, which can have negative repercussions on their work ability. This cross-sectional study with 70 informal caregivers aims to evaluate the work ability of informal caregivers caring at home for patients followed by the Public Home Care Service in Bauru, Brazil, as well as to investigate its associated factors. The association between work ability and the variables under study was estimated using simple and multiple logistic regression models, including a hierarchical model. Work ability, care-related burden, sleep quality and quality of life were assessed through the Work Ability Index, the Zarit Burden Interview Scale, the Mini-sleep Questionnaire, and the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey, respectively. Almost 36% of the informal caregivers had an inadequate work ability. The variables that increased the probability of an adequate work ability were quality of life (OR: 0.94; CI: 0.92-0.97) and self-perceived physical fitness (OR: 0.32; CI: 0.17-0.60), while those that reduced the likelihood of adequate work ability were age (OR: 1.06; CI: 1.02-1.13), burden (OR: 1.05; CI: 1.01-1.10) and poor sleep quality (OR: 1.07; CI: 1.01-1.12). It is necessary to develop public health policies aimed at informal caregivers who, due to their informality, are not seen as workers.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据