Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem

dc.contributor.authorGonçalves-Pereira, Manuel
dc.contributor.authorGonzález-Fraile, Eduardo (UNIR)
dc.contributor.authorSantos-Zorrozua, Borja
dc.contributor.authorMartin-Carrasco, Manuel
dc.contributor.authorFernández-Catalina, Paola
dc.contributor.authorDomínguez-Panchón, Ana I
dc.contributor.authorMuñoz-Hermoso, Paula
dc.contributor.authorBallesteros, Javier
dc.date2017-04
dc.date.accessioned2017-09-07T16:21:59Z
dc.date.available2017-09-07T16:21:59Z
dc.identifier.issn1477-7525
dc.identifier.urihttp://reunir.unir.net/123456789/5531
dc.description.abstractBackground: The Zarit Burden Interview ( ZBI) was originally developed to assess the level of subjective burden in caregivers of people with dementia. The Involvement Evaluation Questionnaire ( IEQ) is amongst the leading scales to assess caregiving consequences in severe mental illness. We aimed to compare the psychometric properties of the ZBI, a generic tool, and of the IEQ, a more specific tool to assess the consequences of caregiving in schizophrenia and related disorders. Methods: Secondary analyses of a 16- week, randomized controlled trial of a psychoeducational intervention in 223 primary caregivers of patients with schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. Psychometric properties ( internal consistency, convergent and discriminative validity, and sensitivity to change) were evaluated for both ZBI and IEQ. Results: Internal consistency was good and similar for both scales ( ZBI: 0.91, 95% CI: 0.89, 0.94; IEQ: 0.86, 95% CI: 0. 83, 0.89). Convergent validity was relevant for similar domains ( e. g. ZBI total score vs IEQ- tension r = 0.69, 95% CI: 0. 61, 0.75) and at least moderate for the rest of domains ( ZBI total score, personal strain and role strain vs IEQ- urging and supervision). Discriminative validity against psychological distress and depressive symptoms was good ( Area Under the Curve [ AUC]: 0.77, 95% CI: 0.71, 0.83; and 0.69, 95% CI: 0.63, 0.78 - for ZBI against GHQ- 28 and CES- D respectively; and AUC: 0.72, 95% CI: 0.65, 0.78; and 0.69, 95% CI: 0.62, 0.77 - for IEQ against GHQ- 28 and CES- D respectively). AUCs against the reference criteria did not differ significantly between the two scales. After the intervention, both scales showed a significant decrease at endpoint ( p- values < 0.001) with similar standardised effect sizes for change (- 0.36, 95% CI: - 0.58, - 0.15 - for ZBI; - 0.39, 95% CI: - 0.60, - 0.18 - for IEQ). Conclusions: Both ZBI and IEQ have shown satisfactory psychometric properties to assess caregiver burden in this sample. We provided further evidence on the performance of the ZBI as a general measure of subjective burden.es_ES
dc.language.isoenges_ES
dc.publisherHealth and Quality of Life Outcomeses_ES
dc.relation.ispartofseries;vol. 15
dc.relation.urihttps://hqlo.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/s12955-017-0626-8es_ES
dc.rightsopenAccesses_ES
dc.subjectpsychometricses_ES
dc.subjectcaregiverses_ES
dc.subjectschizophreniaes_ES
dc.subjectcommunityes_ES
dc.subjectcost of illnesses_ES
dc.subjectJCRes_ES
dc.titleAssessment of the consequences of caregiving in psychosis: a psychometric comparison of the Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) and the Involvement Evaluation Questionnaire (IEQ)es_ES
dc.typeArticulo Revista Indexadaes_ES
reunir.tag~ARIes_ES
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s12955-017-0626-8


Ficheros en el ítem

FicherosTamañoFormatoVer

No hay ficheros asociados a este ítem.

Este ítem aparece en la(s) siguiente(s) colección(ones)

Mostrar el registro sencillo del ítem