Dataset Information

Getting back or giving back: understanding caregiver motivations and willingness to provide informal care.

ABSTRACT: Background: Informal caregivers are those providing care, which exceeds that which is typically provided, to a relative or friend with care needs. Informal caregiving constitutes the backbone of a society's care supply and with ageing populations the need for informal care is growing. We know little as to why caregivers start caring and continue doing so, yet understanding of motivations and willingness to provide care is important if informal caregivers are to be supported. However, both motivations and willingness are inconsistently defined making it difficult to compare the empirical findings that do exist. Methods: This paper reviews and synthesises thinking about the theoretical constructs of motivations to provide care and willingness to perform informal care, and presents those in relation to existing theoretical and empirical literature. Results and Conclusions: Theoretical reflections based on various motivational frameworks and available empirical data are presented to illustrate that: caregiving motivations should be conceptualised as multifaceted and multiply determined; intrinsic and extrinsic motivations should not be treated as antagonistic and can occur simultaneously; the commonly applied model of extrinsic/intrinsic motivations is oversimplified and omits consideration of the diversity of caregiver motives; other motivational models can be discerned in the context of the empirical research; there are differences between motivations and willingness to provide care with the latter being more consequent to the motives; both should be considered dynamic in nature; and finally, that the two constructs may not inevitably lead to actual caregiver behaviour. The implications of these theoretical reflections for methodology and research as well as their relevance for practice and policy are indicated.

SUBMITTER: Zarzycki M

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8281125 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:IntroductionDistance caregivers (DCGs) are a growing population with substantial contribution to informal care. While a reasonable amount is known on the determinants of motives and willingness to provide local informal care, and the local caregiver outcomes, reports for the distance caregiving population are lacking. An evidence synthesis of what motivates and makes DCGs willing to care from a distance and the impact of that care on their mental and physical health would highlight any gaps or consensus in knowledge. This would guide the research needed towards the development of tailored interventions, in order to support DCGs and promote the sustainability of distance care.Methods and analysisThis protocol adheres to Preferred Items for Reporting of Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses Protocols guidelines and the Joanna Briggs Institute (JBI) Methodology for mixed-method reviews. A comprehensive search strategy will be conducted in four electronic databases (CINAHL, MEDLINE, PubMed and PsycINFO). Grey literature will also be assessed to minimise publication bias. Two independent reviewers will assess each study for inclusion and any discrepancies will be resolved with the consultation of a third reviewer. Eligible studies for inclusion will be English language studies exploring the motives and willingness to care for a care recipient with a chronic disease, disability or frailty from a geographical distance; or studies focusing on the mental and physical health outcomes of DCGs. Qualitative and quantitative data will be integrated in a single qualitative synthesis following the JBI convergent integrated approach. Study quality will be assessed using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool version 2018.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval is not required for this study as no primary data will be collected. Findings will be disseminated through peer-reviewed publication and presentations at academic conferences and lay summaries for various stakeholders.Prospero registration numberCRD42020156350.

Project description:BackgroundCaregiver interventions may help improve the quality of informal care. Yet the lack of a systematic framework specifying the targets and outcomes of caregiver interventions hampers our ability to understand what has been studied, to evaluate existing programs, and to inform the design of future programs. Our goal was to develop an organizing framework detailing the components of the caregiving activities and the caregiver and care recipient outcomes that should be affected by an intervention. In so doing, we characterize what has been measured in the published literature to date and what should be measured in future studies to enable comparisons across interventions and across time.MethodsOur data set comprises 121 reports of caregiver interventions conducted in the United States and published between 2000 and 2009. We extracted information on variables that have been examined as primary and secondary outcomes. These variables were grouped into categories, which then informed the organizing framework. We calculated the frequency with which the interventions examined each framework component to identify areas about which we have the most knowledge and under-studied areas that deserve attention in future research.ResultsThe framework stipulates that caregiver interventions seek to change caregiving activities, which in turn affect caregiver and care recipient outcomes. The most frequently assessed variables have been caregiver psychological outcomes (especially depression and burden) and care recipient physical and health care use outcomes.ConclusionsBased on the organizing framework, we make three key recommendations to guide interventions and inform research and policy. First, all intervention studies should assess quality and/or quantity of caregiving activities to help understand to what extent and how well the intervention worked. Second, intervention studies should assess a broad range of caregiver and care recipient outcomes, including considering whether expanding to economic status and health care use of the caregiver can be accommodated, to ease subsequent economic evaluations of caregiving. Third, intervention studies should measure a common set of outcomes to facilitate cross-time and cross-study comparisons of effectiveness.

Project description:BackgroundThere is growing evidence that informal payments for health care are fairly common in many low- and middle-income countries. Informal payments are reported to have a negative consequence on equity and quality of care; it has been suggested, however, that they may contribute to health worker motivation and retention. Given the significance of motivation and retention issues in human resources for health, a better understanding of the relationships between the two phenomena is needed. This study attempts to assess whether and in what ways informal payments occur in Kibaha, Tanzania. Moreover, it aims to assess how informal earnings might help boost health worker motivation and retention.MethodsNine focus groups were conducted in three health facilities of different levels in the health system. In total, 64 health workers participated in the focus group discussions (81% female, 19% male) and where possible, focus groups were divided by cadre. All data were processed and analysed by means of the NVivo software package.ResultsThe use of informal payments in the study area was confirmed by this study. Furthermore, a negative relationship between informal payments and job satisfaction and better motivation is suggested. Participants mentioned that they felt enslaved by patients as a result of being bribed and this resulted in loss of self-esteem. Furthermore, fear of detection was a main demotivating factor. These factors seem to counterbalance the positive effect of financial incentives. Moreover, informal payments were not found to be related to retention of health workers in the public health system. Other factors such as job security seemed to be more relevant for retention.ConclusionThis study suggests that the practice of informal payments contributes to the general demotivation of health workers and negatively affects access to health care services and quality of the health system. Policy action is needed that not only provides better financial incentives for individuals but also tackles an environment in which corruption is endemic.

Dataset Information

Getting back or giving back: understanding caregiver motivations and willingness to provide informal care.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets