Background Older adults with cancer are vulnerable to functional decline, placing greater onus on caregivers. Few studies have prospectively examined burden in caregivers of older cancer patients. We sought to determine factors associated with high caregiver burden. Methods 100 caregivers of patients age ≥65 with cancer, recruited at a single-institution, completed questionnaires gauging their perception of the patient’s physical, emotional, and social health. The association between these items, cancer-related factors, sociodemographic factors, and caregiver burden [measured by the Caregiver Strain Index (CSI)] was determined through multivariate analysis. Results Patients were a median age of 70 (range 65–91), 70% had advanced disease, and 98% were receiving treatment. Caregivers were mostly female (73%), spouses (68%), and lived with the patient (79%). Median hours of care provided was 10 hours/week. Mean CSI score was 3.1±3.2. Most caregivers (75%) reported some burden, with 15% reporting high caregiver burden (CSI ≥7). In multivariate analysis, employed caregivers (OR 4.5; 95% CI 1.1–18.4, p=0.04) and those who cared for patients requiring more help with instrumental activities of daily living (OARS-IADL score <12 of 14) (OR 12.4; 95% CI 2.4–62.5, p<0.001) were more likely to experience high caregiver burden (CSI ≥7). Conclusions Caregiver burden is common in those who care for older cancer patients. High burden is more likely in employed caregivers and those who care for patients who require increased functional assistance. Further studies are needed to determine unique challenges experienced by caregivers of older adults with cancer and potential interventions to alleviate burden in these caregivers.
QUESTION ASKED: Does a computer-based approach for collecting geriatric assessment information provide a practical and efficient means of obtaining reliable and reproducible data from older adults with cancer?SUMMARY ANSWER: Computer-based geriatric assessment provides a feasible, reliable, and valid approach in older adults with cancer. WHAT WE DID:Older patients ($ 65 years) with cancer were randomly assigned to one of four treatment arms to compare the feasibility, reliability, and validity of two computer-based platforms for geriatric assessment with traditional paper-and-pencil data capture.WHAT WE FOUND: Completion times were similar for computer-based and paper-and-pencil assessments (Fig), and data gathered via computer-based assessment showed high test-retest reliability as well as internal consistency. BIAS, CONFOUNDING FACTOR(S), REAL-LIFE IMPLICATIONS:Many of the patients in our study were white, non-Hispanic, and college-educated older adults. This patient population may be more comfortable using computer technologies than other demographic groups; thus our results may not be generalizable to other segments of the patient population. Older patients with cancer are at increased risk for treatment toxicity. Geriatric assessment captures a range of physiological and psychological metrics that predict toxicity and survival, and thus have high utility in guiding interventions. In the current study, we found that computer-based geriatric assessment provides an efficient method for acquiring reliable and valid data. Adoption of computer-based geriatric assessment into oncology practice thus can provide a cost-and time-efficient approach for acquiring high-value data to be used in formulating treatment decisions for older adults with cancer. Completion Time (minutes) Abstract PurposeThe goal of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, reliability, and validity of a computerbased geriatric assessment via two methods of electronic data capture (SupportScreen and REDCap) compared with paper-and-pencil data capture among older adults with cancer. MethodsEligible patients were $ 65 years old, had a cancer diagnosis, and were fluent in English.Patients were randomly assigned to one of four arms, in which they completed the geriatric assessment twice: (1) REDCap and paper and pencil in sessions 1 and 2; (2) REDCap in both sessions; (3) SupportScreen and paper and pencil in sessions 1 and 2; and (4) SupportScreen in both sessions. The feasibility, reliability, and validity of the computer-based geriatric assessment compared with paper and pencil were evaluated. ResultsThe median age of participants (N = 100) was 71 years (range, 65 to 91 years) and the diagnosis was solid tumor (82%) or hematologic malignancy (18% ). There were no significant differences in completion times between SupportScreen and paper and pencil (P = .50). The computer-based geriatric assessment was feasible. Few participants (8%) needed help with completing the geriatric assessment (REDCap, n = 7 and SupportScreen, n = 1), 89% reported th...
Many families and close friends are experiencing bereavement due to cancer. A review of recent studies of bereavement outcomes, mainly elevated psychological distress, suggests that bereaved family members, compared with nonbereaved, have poorer quality of life. They display high levels of complicated grief, anxiety, and depression and use bereavement services, but also report finding meaning in the loss, during the first 6 months after death. Similar demographic (e.g., female sex and younger age) and psychological (e.g., premorbid mental health conditions and lack of preparedness for the death) predictors are related to the bereavement outcomes across different familial groups. However, the severity of psychological distress and bereavement needs expressed vary by familial groups. Unrelieved pain and anxiety of the patient before the death and family members being unprepared for the impending death appear to be related to several postdeath psychological and physical morbidities of the surviving family members. Although the number of articles addressing bereavement-related issues associated with cancer has been growing in recent years, more rigorous studies that use longitudinal prospective designs, which bridge cancer survivorship with bereavement research, are needed.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.