4.4 Article

The Dutch Objective Burden Inventory: Validity and reliability in a Canadian population of caregivers for people with heart failure

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF CARDIOVASCULAR NURSING
卷 10, 期 4, 页码 234-240

出版社

SAGE PUBLICATIONS LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ejcnurse.2010.08.006

关键词

Heart failure; Caregiver burden; Reliability; Validity

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Evidence suggests that caregivers of people with heart failure (HF) often experience caregiver burden and emotional distress. However, these studies measured the caregiving experience using generic tools since a disease-specific tool was not available. Recently, the Dutch Objective Burden Inventory (DOBI) was developed as a disease-specific tool measuring objective caregiver burden in a Dutch HF population of caregivers. Using a cross-sectional design, caregivers of HF patients attending an outpatient HF clinic completed the DOBI, the Hosptial Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) and the Caregiver Reaction Assessment (CRA). Caregivers (n=47) were mainly female (72%) and spouses (72%) of the HF patients with a mean age of 63.1 (+/-10.4) years. Patients were older (mean age 72.7; +/-10.6), 64% male and had advanced HF. Feasibility for the objective portion of the DOBI was excellent with <10% missing values. The subjective component of the DOBI was incomplete and could not be used in the analyses. Seven items had minimal variability. Significant relationships emerged between the DOBI, CRA and HADS revealing construct validity for all subscales of the DOBI. Cronbach's alpha was >.80 for all DOBI subscales. The DOBI is the only disease-specific tool that measures burden for caregivers of HF patients. The objective portion of the DOBI showed evidence of adequate internal consistency and construct validity in a Canadian population of caregivers of HF patients attending a HF Clinic. Further testing is needed to determine floor and ceiling effects for DOBI items and responsiveness of this tool. (C) 2010 European Society of Cardiology. Published by Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

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

4.4
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