A study of dyadic interdependence of control, social participation and occupation of adults who use long-term care services and their carers

Abstract

Purpose Unpaid care is an important source of support of people with long-term conditions. Interdependence of carers’ and care recipients’ quality of life would be expected due to the relational nature of caregiving. This study aims to explore interdependence of quality of life in carer/care-recipient dyads, especially in relation to mutual interdependence due to social feedback in the caregiving relationship and also the partner effects of one partner’s experience of long-term care support on the other’s outcomes.MethodsUsing data collected in an interview survey of 264 adults with care support needs and their unpaid carers in England, we employed regression analysis to explore whether there is mutual interdependence of care-related quality of life within carer/care-recipient dyads for three quality of life attributes: Control over daily life, Social participation and Occupation. The influence of factors, including satisfaction with long-term care, were also considered on individuals’ and dyad partners’ care-related quality of life.ResultsWe found mutual interdependence of quality of life at the dyad-level for Control over daily life, but not Occupation or Social participation. A partner effect of care recipients’ satisfaction with long-term care on carers’ Control over daily life was also observed. Higher care recipient satisfaction with care services was associated with higher Control over daily life. By contrast, for Social participation and Occupation, there were only significant effects of care recipients’ satisfaction with long-term care and their own quality of life.ConclusionsThese findings highlight the importance of considering the wider impact beyond the individual of long-term care on quality of life in the evaluation of long-term care policy and practice.

Relational aspects of mastery for frail, older adults: The role of informal caregivers in the care process

“…Finally, this study did not conduct dyadic interviews with informal caregivers. Studies involving the voices of caregivers’ point towards the existing differences in the various actor's perceptions (Brimblecombe, Pickard, King, & Knapp, ; Turcotte et al, ) and indicate that caregivers’ and care recipients’ rating of control over their daily life are mutually interdependent (Rand, Forder, & Malley, ). Another study explored dyadic associations of mastery beliefs among older partners and suggested that partners’ mastery beliefs matter for the health (behaviours) of older adults (Drewelies, Chopik, Hoppmann, Smith, & Gerstorf, ).…”

Assessing the Structural Characteristics of the Japanese Version of the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit for Carers

“…14 The ASCOT-Carer was developed to reflect the social care policy and legislative focus on informal caregivers' wellbeing and QoL, 15 which recognizes that caregivers are co-clients of LTC along with the people they support. [16][17][18][19] The ASCOT-Carer is included in the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT), 3 a suite of instruments designed to measure LTC-related QoL of recipients [20][21][22] and informal caregivers. 14,[16][17][18][19] The ASCOT-Carer and an instrument for LTC recipients incorporate multiple dimensions of QoL that can be improved by LTC, for example, control over daily life, personal safety, and social participation.…”

“…[16][17][18][19] The ASCOT-Carer is included in the Adult Social Care Outcomes Toolkit (ASCOT), 3 a suite of instruments designed to measure LTC-related QoL of recipients [20][21][22] and informal caregivers. 14,[16][17][18][19] The ASCOT-Carer and an instrument for LTC recipients incorporate multiple dimensions of QoL that can be improved by LTC, for example, control over daily life, personal safety, and social participation. 14,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22] The ASCOT-Carer and LTC recipient instruments have 4 overlapping QoL dimensions: control over daily life, social participation, personal safety, and occupation ("doing things I find value in and enjoy").…”

“…14,[16][17][18][19] The ASCOT-Carer and an instrument for LTC recipients incorporate multiple dimensions of QoL that can be improved by LTC, for example, control over daily life, personal safety, and social participation. 14,[16][17][18][19][20][21][22] The ASCOT-Carer and LTC recipient instruments have 4 overlapping QoL dimensions: control over daily life, social participation, personal safety, and occupation ("doing things I find value in and enjoy"). Other QoL domains are specific to caregivers (e.g., feeling supported and encouraged in the caring role) or LTC recipients (e.g., food and drink).…”

The impact of social care services on carers’ quality of life

“…Here, the impact of social care services may be through the impact on the care-recipient (e.g. home care may improve the carerecipient's QoL and, thereby, also the carer's QoL) via the mutual dependence in utility between the cared-for person and their carer (Becker, 1981;Van Houtven and Norton, 2004;Rand et al, 2017).…”