Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
Objective: Caring for patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD) is a stressful situation and an overwhelming task for family caregivers. Therefore, these caregivers need to have their hardiness empowered to provide proper and appropriate care to these older adults. From the introduction of the concept of hardiness, few studies have been conducted to assess the hardiness of caregivers of patients with AD. Presumably, one reason for this knowledge gap is the lack of a proper scale to evaluate hardiness in this group. This study was conducted to develop a reliable and valid Family Caregivers' Hardiness Scale (FCHS) to measure this concept accurately among Iranian family caregivers sample. Methods: an online form questionnaire. In this step, the items of the FCHS were evaluated using face and content validity. Then, the factor structure was determined and confirmed using exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) followed by convergent and divergent validity, respectively. Finally, scale reliability, including stability, and internal consistency were evaluated. Results: The finding revealed that FCHS consists of five factors, namely, "Religious Coping" (5 items), "Self-Management" (6 items), "Empathic Communication" (3 items), "Family Affective Commitment" (3 items), and "Purposeful Interaction" (4 items) that explained 58.72% of the total variance. The results of CFA showed a good model fit. Reliability showed acceptable internal consistency and stability. Conclusion: Based on the results of the psychometric evaluation of the FCHS, turned out that the concept of hardiness in Iranian family caregivers is a multidimensional concept that is most focused on individual-cultural values, emotional family relationships, and social relationships. The designed scale also has acceptable validity and reliability features that can be used in future studies to measure this concept in family caregivers.
Hosseini et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: