2006
DOI: 10.1192/bjp.bp.104.007294
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Influence of carer expressed emotion and affect on relapse in non-affective psychosis

Abstract: Our hypothesis was partially supported. Carer criticism was associated with patient anxiety, low carer self-esteem and poor carer coping strategies. Family interventions should focus on improving these after a relapse of symptoms of psychosis.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1
1
1
1

Citation Types

10
95
0
2

Year Published

2008
2008
2016
2016

Publication Types

Select...
4
4

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 94 publications
(107 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
10
95
0
2
Order By: Relevance
“…Furthermore, our findings are similar to those of the pioneer studies of EE by Brown [33] on the key family caregivers' EE using the Camberwell Family Interview that the nature of EE is multidimensional and complex, consisting of four to six domains. The three components of family EE perceived by the patients that are embedded in the LEE scale similar to those identified by Brown [33] and Kuipers et al [34] included emotional overinvolvement, critical comments/hostility, and positive attitude (or remarks) towards patient.…”
Section: Confirmatory Factormentioning
confidence: 98%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Furthermore, our findings are similar to those of the pioneer studies of EE by Brown [33] on the key family caregivers' EE using the Camberwell Family Interview that the nature of EE is multidimensional and complex, consisting of four to six domains. The three components of family EE perceived by the patients that are embedded in the LEE scale similar to those identified by Brown [33] and Kuipers et al [34] included emotional overinvolvement, critical comments/hostility, and positive attitude (or remarks) towards patient.…”
Section: Confirmatory Factormentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The Scientific World Journal (6) 0.47 (3) Does not insist on doing things with me (14) 0.48 (4) Does not pry into my life (41) 0.47 (5) Supports me when I need it (36) 0.56 (6) Is not always interfering (10) 0.46 (7) Leaves me feeling overwhelmed (20) 0.49 (8) Often checks up me to see what I am doing (24) 0.46 (9) Isn't always nosing into my business (28) 0.51 (10) Always has to know everything about me (32) 0.49 (11) Butts into my private matters (37) 0.45 (12) Gets upset when I do not check in with him/her (49) 0.52 (1) Is sympathetic toward me when I'm ill or upset (8) 0.51 (2) Encourages me to seek outside help when I'm not feeling well (12) 0.48 (3) Makes me feel valuable as a person (19) 0.50 (4) Tries to make me feel better when I'm upset or ill (26) 0.50 (5) Is willing to gain more information to understand my condition when I'm not feeling well (39) 0.42 (6) Doesn't blame me when I'm feeling unwell (43) 0.47 (7) Tries to reassure me when I'm not feeling well (51) 0.41 (8) Says I just want attention when I say I'm not well (4) 0.45 (9) Doesn't help me when I'm upset or feeling unwell (15) 0.47 (10) Says I cause my troubles to occur in order to get back at him/her (22) 0.50 (11) Says it is OK to seek professional help (30) 0.45 (12) Accuses me of exaggerating when I say I'm unwell (34) 0.50 (13) Often accuses me of making things up when I'm not feeling well (47) 0.48 (1) Is tolerant with me even when I'm not meeting his/her expectations (2) 0.45 (2) Can see my point of view (9) 0.41 (3) Doesn't feel that I'm causing him/her a lot of trouble (13) 0.43 (4) Understands my limitations (23) 0.46 (5) Blames me for things not going well (18) 0.51 (6) Is realistic about what I can and cannot do (27) 0.49 (7) Is understanding if I make mistakes (40) 0.42 (8) Makes me feel guilty for not meeting his/her expectations (5)...…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The status of "carer'" (consistent with the definition reported in Kuipers et al 29 ) covered parents, spouses, or partners of an identified patient and living with the patient; individuals living with a patient and willingly classified by themselves and the patient as a caregiver; individuals acknowledged as caregivers not living with the patient but maintaining 3 or more face-to-face weekly contacts with the patient, totalling at least 10 hours. Maudsley and Bethlem Royal Hospitals, and the Multi-Centre Research Ethics Committee, provided ethical approval of the study.…”
Section: Methodsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The original IPQ was widely used in various physical illness populations and has good psychometric properties. 23,29 To measure the illness beliefs relating to psychosis from a caregiver's perspective, Barrowclough et al 24 modified 3 subscales of the original IPQ (that is, consequences, cure-control, and timeline) to provide parallel patient and caregiver forms.…”
Section: Caregiver Measuresmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Possibly the way relatives appraise interactions determines their emotional responses. Prior evidence suggests that negative evaluations of caregiving directly relate to carer stress (Kuipers et al, 2006) and that understanding relatives' beliefs and appraisals may help us identify those at risk of enduring problems (Barrowclough et al, 2014). Thus, clinical support offered to relatives should identify early on which beliefs and interactional styles are more adaptive.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%