PMID- 15053130
OWN - NLM
STAT- MEDLINE
DCOM- 20040603
LR  - 20220408
IS  - 0269-2155 (Print)
IS  - 0269-2155 (Linking)
VI  - 18
IP  - 2
DP  - 2004 Mar
TI  - Instruments for assessing the burden of informal caregiving for stroke patients 
      in clinical practice: a comparison of CSI, CRA, SCQ and self-rated burden.
PG  - 203-14
AB  - OBJECTIVE: To compare the feasibility, convergent and clinical validity of three 
      commonly used burden scales: Caregiver Strain Index (CSI), Caregiver Reaction 
      Assessment (CRA) and Sense of Competence Questionnaire (SCQ), with a 
      self-developed single question on self-rated burden (SRB). SUBJECTS: Stroke 
      patients receiving support from an informal caregiver (n = 148) and their 
      caregivers were followed up to six months after stroke. INTERVENTION: Feasibility 
      was assessed with several measures of missing values. Convergent validity was 
      assessed on the basis of the correlation patterns between the burden scales, and 
      clinical validity through evaluation of expected associations between levels of 
      burden and explanatory patients' and caregivers' characteristics. RESULTS: 
      Missing values were less often observed on CSI and SRB than SCQ and CRA. 
      Significant correlation coefficients (p < 0.05) could be demonstrated between all 
      burden scales, except for one subscale of CRA. Evidence for clinical validity was 
      strongest for CSI and SRB, based on associations between higher burden scores and 
      patients' disability, and patients' and caregivers' poor level of health-related 
      quality of life (all p < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: A concise and simple measure would 
      facilitate early detection of caregivers at risk in clinical practice and 
      research. CSI and SRB are more feasible and at least as valid instruments for 
      assessment of caregiver burden in stroke than the longer and more complex SCQ and 
      CRA. SRB could be used for quick screening of caregivers at risk. CSI is 
      indicated for further diagnosis of the burden of informal caregivers.
FAU - van Exel, N Job A
AU  - van Exel NJ
AD  - Institute for Medical Technology Assessment (iMTA) and Department of Health 
      Policy and Management (iBMG), Erasmus University Rotterdam, The Netherlands. 
      vanexel@bmg.eur.nl
FAU - Scholte op Reimer, Wilma J M
AU  - Scholte op Reimer WJ
FAU - Brouwer, Werner B F
AU  - Brouwer WB
FAU - van den Berg, Bernard
AU  - van den Berg B
FAU - Koopmanschap, Marc A
AU  - Koopmanschap MA
FAU - van den Bos, Geertrudis A M
AU  - van den Bos GA
LA  - eng
PT  - Journal Article
PT  - Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
PL  - England
TA  - Clin Rehabil
JT  - Clinical rehabilitation
JID - 8802181
SB  - IM
MH  - Aged
MH  - Caregivers/*psychology
MH  - Disability Evaluation
MH  - Female
MH  - Humans
MH  - Male
MH  - Middle Aged
MH  - *Quality of Life
MH  - Severity of Illness Index
MH  - Stroke/*classification
MH  - Surveys and Questionnaires
EDAT- 2004/04/01 05:00
MHDA- 2004/06/04 05:00
CRDT- 2004/04/01 05:00
PHST- 2004/04/01 05:00 [pubmed]
PHST- 2004/06/04 05:00 [medline]
PHST- 2004/04/01 05:00 [entrez]
AID - 10.1191/0269215504cr723oa [doi]
PST - ppublish
SO  - Clin Rehabil. 2004 Mar;18(2):203-14. doi: 10.1191/0269215504cr723oa.