IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0268884.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Stress on caregivers providing prolonged mechanical ventilation patient care in different facilities: A cross-sectional study

Author

Listed:
  • Yeong-Ruey Chu
  • Chin-Jung Liu
  • Chia-Chen Chu
  • Pei-Tseng Kung
  • Wen-Yu Chou
  • Wen-Chen Tsai

Abstract

Purpose: Taiwan has implemented an integrated prospective payment program (IPP) for prolonged mechanical ventilation (PMV) patients that consists of four stages of care: intensive care unit (ICU), respiratory care center (RCC), respiratory care ward (RCW), and respiratory home care (RHC). We aimed to investigate the life impact on family caregivers of PMV patients opting for a payment program and compared different care units. Method: A total of 610 questionnaires were recalled. Statistical analyses were conducted by using the chi-square test and multivariate logistic regression model. Results: The results indicated no associations between caregivers’ stress levels and opting for a payment program. Participants in the non-IPP group spent less time with friends and family owing to caregiver responsibilities. The results of the family domain show that the RHC group (OR = 2.54) had worsened family relationships compared with the ICU group; however, there was less psychological stress in the RCC (OR = 0.54) and RCW (OR = 0.16) groups than in the ICU group. In the social domain, RHC interviewees experienced reduced friend and family interactivity (OR = 2.18) and community or religious activities (OR = 2.06) than the ICU group. The RCW group felt that leisure and work time had less effect (OR = 0.37 and 0.41) than the ICU group. Furthermore, RCW interviewees (OR = 0.43) were less influenced by the reduced family income than the ICU group in the economic domain. Conclusions: RHC family caregivers had the highest level of stress, whereas family caregivers in the RCW group had the lowest level of stress.

Suggested Citation

  • Yeong-Ruey Chu & Chin-Jung Liu & Chia-Chen Chu & Pei-Tseng Kung & Wen-Yu Chou & Wen-Chen Tsai, 2022. "Stress on caregivers providing prolonged mechanical ventilation patient care in different facilities: A cross-sectional study," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 17(5), pages 1-14, May.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0268884
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0268884
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0268884
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0268884&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0268884?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Liu, Chin-Jung & Kung, Pei-Tseng & Chu, Chia-Chen & Chou, Wen-Yu & Wang, Yueh-Hsin & Tsai, Wen-Chen, 2018. "Propensity score-matching analyses on the effectiveness of integrated prospective payment program for patients with prolonged mechanical ventilation," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 122(9), pages 970-976.
    2. Claire Minton & Lesley Batten & Annette Huntington, 2018. "The impact of a prolonged stay in the ICU on patients’ fundamental care needs," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(11-12), pages 2300-2310, June.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Alvisa Palese & Jessica Longhini & Matteo Danielis, 2021. "To what extent Unfinished Nursing Care tools coincide with the discrete elements of The Fundamentals of Care Framework? A comparative analysis based on a systematic review," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 30(1-2), pages 239-265, January.
    2. Catharina Lindberg & Cecilia Fagerström & Ania Willman, 2018. "Patient autonomy in a high‐tech care context—A theoretical framework," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(21-22), pages 4128-4140, November.
    3. Debra Jackson & Olga Kozlowska, 2018. "Fundamental care—the quest for evidence," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(11-12), pages 2177-2178, June.
    4. Alison Kitson, 2018. "Moving on…," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(11-12), pages 2175-2176, June.
    5. Cathleen Aspinall & Jenny M. Parr & Julia Slark & Denise Wilson, 2020. "The culture conversation: Report from the 2nd Australasian ILC meeting—Auckland 2019," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 29(11-12), pages 1768-1773, June.

    More about this item

    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:plo:pone00:0268884. 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.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with 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: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

    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.