Key result
Latent profile analysis identified two categories of dyadic disease appraisal in CHF patients, with shorter disease duration, lower social support, and higher caregiver burden and anxiety significantly predicting membership in the negative difference group.
Why the study?
This study explored potential categories of dyadic disease appraisal differences among patients hospitalized with CHF in China and analyzed the main factors influencing these categories.
Cross-Sectional (n=262)
Yes
Absolute Event Rate: 10.7% vs 89.3%
There is significant heterogeneity in how CHF patients and their caregivers appraise the disease, highlighting the need for targeted support for vulnerable dyads, particularly those with older female caregivers experiencing high burden and anxiety.
Dyadic appraisal differences may inform CHF support strategies; leaves open targeted interventions pending validation.
PURPOSE: This study explored potential categories of dyadic disease appraisal differences among patients hospitalized with chronic heart failure (CHF) in China and analyzed the main factors influencing these categories. METHODS: A survey was conducted using various tools and scales, including the Chinese version of the Memorial Heart Failure Symptom Appraisal Scale, Heart failure self-care index scale, Social Support Rating Scale, Zarit burden interview, and Self-rating anxiety scale. The data was collected from patients who were hospitalized with CHF in the cardiology department of one of two tertiary hospitals in Nanchong City, China. The dyadic disease appraisal categories were identified using latent profile analysis (LPA). Multiple logistic regression analysis was also employed to analyze the factors influencing the formation of potential categories of differences in dyadic disease appraisal in CHF patients. RESULTS: A total of 262 pairs of hospitalized CHF patients and their caregivers participated in this study. The dyadic disease appraisal of CHF patients was potentially categorized as the "negative difference group" (28 individuals, 10.7%) and the "positive or convergence group" (234 persons, 89.3%). The results showed that the factors influencing the categorization of dyadic disease appraisal differences included the patient's social support, disease progression, and Caregivers anxiety level, burden, gender, educational attainment, and age (p < 0.05). CONCLUSION: The study findings demonstrated heterogeneity between the two groups of CHF patients in the dyadic disease appraisal. Therefore, it is necessary to focus on patients who have a brief duration of illness and limited social support. Specifically, it is important to prioritize support for female caregivers who are 65 years or older, have lower levels of educational attainment, and experience a significant burden and anxiety. Regular implementation of support person-bilateral co-management strategies can effectively reduce differences in how the disease is perceived and enhance the overall well-being of both caregivers and patients.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ren et al. (2024) conducted a cross-sectional in Chronic heart failure (n=262). Patient and caregiver characteristics (social support, disease course, caregiver anxiety and burden) was evaluated on Latent profile categories of dyadic disease appraisal differences (negative difference group vs positive or convergence group). Latent profile analysis identified two categories of dyadic disease appraisal in CHF patients, with shorter disease duration, lower social support, and higher caregiver burden and anxiety significantly predicting membership in the negative difference group.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: