IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/gam/jijerp/v22y2025i7p1075-d1695309.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Well-Being of Family Caregivers of Individuals with Spinal Cord Injury: The Moderating Effects of Online Versus In-Person Social Support

Author

Listed:
  • Victoria Bogle

    (Department of Psychology, Kingston University, London KT1 2EE, UK)

  • William C. Miller

    (Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 2B5, Canada
    Rehabilitation Research Program, GF Strong Rehabilitation Centre, Vancouver, BC V5Z 2G9, Canada
    Centre for Aging SMART, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC V6H 3Z6, Canada)

  • Heather Cathcart

    (Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 2B5, Canada
    Rehabilitation Research Program, GF Strong Rehabilitation Centre, Vancouver, BC V5Z 2G9, Canada
    Centre for Aging SMART, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC V6H 3Z6, Canada)

  • Somayyeh Mohammadi

    (Department of Occupational Science and Occupational Therapy, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC V6T 2B5, Canada
    Rehabilitation Research Program, GF Strong Rehabilitation Centre, Vancouver, BC V5Z 2G9, Canada
    Centre for Aging SMART, Vancouver Coastal Health Research Institute, Vancouver, BC V6H 3Z6, Canada)

Abstract

Objective: Family members of individuals with spinal cord injury often take on caregiving responsibilities, which can lead to caregiver burden. One factor that can mitigate the adverse effects of caregiving, such as caregiver burden, is receiving social support. Caregivers can obtain support from people they meet in person (in-person support) and on social media platforms (online support). The current cross-sectional correlational design study investigated the moderating effect of in-person and online support on the association between relationship quality, caregiver competence, caregiver distress, and caregiver burden (dependent variables). Methods: Family caregivers of an individual with spinal cord injury ( n = 115) completed an online survey assessing relationship quality, competence, distress, burden, and in-person and online supports. Results: Moderation analyses showed that the negative associations between relationship quality and physical burden (B = −0.58; p = 0.019) and caregiver competence and physical burden (B = −0.73; p = 0.013) were more pronounced at higher levels of online social support. Furthermore, the magnitude of the negative associations between relationship quality and emotional burden (B = −0.52; p < 0.001) and caregiver competence and emotional burden (B = −0.34, p = 0.012) were more pronounced at higher levels of in-person social support. Moderation analyses also revealed that the positive association between distress and social burden (B = 0.47; p = 0.029) and emotional burden (B = 0.26; p = 0.045) were stronger when caregivers reported higher levels of online support. Conclusions: In-person and online support can buffer some aspects of caregiver burden on caregiver well-being. While online support is usually considered beneficial, greater online engagement may contribute to higher levels of burden when the distress is high. It is possible, however, that caregivers who are more distressed engage more with online media to receive support.

Suggested Citation

  • Victoria Bogle & William C. Miller & Heather Cathcart & Somayyeh Mohammadi, 2025. "Well-Being of Family Caregivers of Individuals with Spinal Cord Injury: The Moderating Effects of Online Versus In-Person Social Support," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 22(7), pages 1-17, July.
  • Handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:22:y:2025:i:7:p:1075-:d:1695309
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/22/7/1075/pdf
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://www.mdpi.com/1660-4601/22/7/1075/
    Download Restriction: no
    ---><---

    More about this item

    Keywords

    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;
    ;

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:gam:jijerp:v:22:y:2025:i:7:p:1075-:d:1695309. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: MDPI Indexing Manager (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://www.mdpi.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.