A Longitudinal Assessment of Parental Caregiving and Blood Pressure Trajectories: Findings from the China Health and Nutrition Survey for Women 2000–2011

Examination of the Healthy Caregiver Effect among Older Adults: Findings from the Canadian Longitudinal Study on Aging

“…Yet, over time, those with low-intensity caregiving responsibility reported more chronic conditions from Baseline to FUP1 compared to noncaregivers, but not high-intensity caregivers. This finding is consistent with previous studies on the caregiving intensity and chronic illness [26], but not with others [19].…”

“…There are several potential limitations worth clarification. First, this study uses the number of caregiving hours as the reference for caregiving intensity, which is similar to prior studies [26, 28]. The choice of indicators of caregiving intensity (i.e., hours, tasks, or frequency) varies across studies, and this study choose caregiving hours for two reasons: (1) the amount of caregiving hours is universally comparable to other studies, but measurements of caregiving tasks and frequency have a greater variation among different studies and (2) the caregiving hours can better reflect the actual caregiving engagement than the caregiving tasks and frequency of care provision.…”

“…Third, the categorization of transition of caregiving intensity over time varies across studies, such as the study of Song and colleagues [44], due to category grouping when sample sizes are small. Lu et al [26] also suggested that compared to noncaregivers or low-intensity caregivers, the very small subsample size of high-intensity caregivers might affect estimates. In our study using the CLSA, high-intensity or changing-intensity caregiver groups had more than 200 participants, allowing for greater granulation of caregiving types/intensities.…”

“…Second, the various health outcomes measured in different studies may explain the inconsistent findings. When it comes to chronic illnesses, some studies focus on one single chronic condition, such as CVD [12] or blood pressure [26], while this study uses an aggregated variable counted from a list of chronic conditions. Functional health was also measured in several ways, represented by ADL and/or IADL dependence [14] or physical performance-based test on walking speed, grip strength, and chair-standing speed [5].…”

“…In a 2-year follow-up study, Fredman and associates found that high-intensity caregivers maintained a high level of functional health, while the functional health of other caregivers declined over time [5]. Also, increased blood pressure level over time was found among low-intensity caregivers, but not high-intensity caregivers, when compared to noncaregivers [26]. Fredman et al [8] further reported a lower mortality rate among high-intensity caregivers, but no difference between low-intensity caregivers and noncaregivers [7].…”