Predicting caregiver burden in general veterinary clients: Contribution of companion animal clinical signs and problem behaviors

Spitznagel, Mary Beth; Jacobson, Dana M.; Cox, Melanie D.; Carlson, Mark D.

doi:10.1016/j.tvjl.2018.04.007

Cited by 49 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 30 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As prior work has demonstrated the association between CG‐QoL and burden in a general veterinary clientele, it is not surprising that this also is the case in a dermatology client sample. The current work also aligns with findings demonstrating the relationship between caregiver burden and both the companion animal's clinical presentation, as well as the client's reaction to specific clinical signs and behaviour changes …”

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

“…The current study collected data from two independent cross‐sectional studies. New data were collected for the dermatology sample, whereas data for general veterinary clients with a healthy dog were extracted from an existing dataset . Only dogs were included, as the majority of respondents in our dermatology sample were dog owners (82.6%) and measurement of skin disease QoL is species‐specific …”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Caregiver burden in the veterinary dermatology client: comparison to healthy controls and relationship to quality of life

Spitznagel

Solc²,

Chapman

et al. 2018

Veterinary Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Skin disease in companion animals often requires long‐term management which may contribute to caregiver burden in the dermatology client. Hypotheses/Objectives We expected greater caregiver burden in dermatology clients relative to healthy control veterinary clients and that no difference would be present between healthy controls and dermatology clients reporting good skin disease control. Within the dermatology sample, we hypothesized that greater caregiver burden would correlate with client perception of the animal's severity of disease (ASD), animal skin disease quality of life (ASD‐QoL), and client general quality of life (CG‐QoL) and skin disease‐related quality of life (CSD‐QoL). Participants Participants were 358 dog owners, including veterinary dermatology clients (n = 152) and healthy general veterinary control clients (n = 206). Methods and materials Cross‐sectional online assessments were completed for client caregiver burden (both samples) and CG‐QoL, CSD‐QoL, ASD‐QoL and ASD (dermatology sample only). Results Caregiver burden was greater in dermatology clients overall relative to healthy controls (P < 0.001); it was comparable for those reporting good skin disease control (P > 0.05). Within the dermatology group, correlations between caregiver burden and CSD‐QoL were high (r = 0.58; P < 0.001). CG‐QoL was predicted by caregiver burden (P < 0.001) but not significantly by CSD‐QoL (P > 0.05). Conclusions and clinical importance In the presence of good skin disease control, caregiver burden in dermatology clients is as low as general veterinary clients with a healthy dog. Understanding client experiences of companion animal skin disease may be optimized by assessing caregiver burden.

show abstract

Section: Discussionsupporting

confidence: 82%

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Caregiver burden in the veterinary dermatology client: comparison to healthy controls and relationship to quality of life

Spitznagel

Solc²,

Chapman

et al. 2018

Veterinary Dermatology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Finally, regarding reference values, because caregiver burden is conceptually due to the burden of providing care during illness, it could be argued that veterinary clients with a healthy companion animal are a suboptimal reference point. However, the present study and prior work demonstrate that when examining self‐reported caregiver burden, a summed total of “0” is actually not typical for owners of a healthy companion animal . In the same way that it is necessary to know the range of values greater than “0” that could be still be considered negative for a given bloodwork titer, it is essential to establish reference values for “normal” burden associated with owning a healthy companion animal.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 68%

“…Additionally, although a strength of this study is the inclu- giver burden, a summed total of "0" is actually not typical for owners of a healthy companion animal. 4,5,8,16 In the same way that it is necessary to know the range of values greater than "0" that could be still be considered negative for a given bloodwork titer, it is essential to establish reference values for "normal" burden associated with owning a healthy companion animal. Work to examine if a still further abbreviated (ie, "screener") version of the measure might also be of benefit.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…To date, assessment of caregiver burden in the veterinary client has been conducted using the Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) 1 adapted for use with pets. 4,5,8 However, at 18 items, this measure might not be feasible to include in a busy practice or in clinical trials where multiple assessment measures must be completed in a short amount of time.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Validation of an abbreviated instrument to assess veterinary client caregiver burden

Spitznagel

Mueller

Fraychak

et al. 2019

Veterinary Internal Medicne

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background Caregiver burden is present in many clients managing illness in a companion animal, but current assessment tools are time‐consuming and lack normative reference values. Objectives Statistical reduction of items in a measure of caregiver burden to create an abbreviated version, validation of the abbreviated version, and calculation of reference values. Animals None. Methods This study was conducted using observational methods. Owners of an ill cat or dog were recruited through social media (n = 429). Veterinary clients with an ill (n = 459) or healthy (n = 961) cat or dog were recruited through a general veterinary and an academic hospital with multiple specialties. The study was conducted in 3 stages: (a) reduction of the Zarit Burden Interview (ZBI) adapted for use in pets via factor and item analyses, (b) psychometric validation of the abbreviated instrument, and (c) standardization of the abbreviated (7 items) and full (18 items) measures. Results A 7‐item measure showed high correlations with the full measure ( r = 0.88‐0.93) and good internal consistency (α = .71‐.75) across samples of veterinary clients with an ill cat or dog. This abbreviated measure correlated significantly ( P < .001) and positively with stress ( r = 0.40‐0.75) and negatively with quality of life ( r = −0.32 to −0.56). Reference values derived from clients with a healthy companion animal suggest “normal” burden ranges of 0 to 17 on the full measure and 0 to 8 on the abbreviated version. Conclusions and Clinical Importance For situations precluding full assessment of client caregiver burden, this brief 7‐item version can be used with good internal consistency and validity. Reference values can help determine if a client's caregiver burden is increased.

show abstract

Dental Patient Welfare

McLeod

2021

The Veterinary Dental Patient

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Predicting caregiver burden in general veterinary clients: Contribution of companion animal clinical signs and problem behaviors

Cited by 49 publications

References 30 publications

Caregiver burden in the veterinary dermatology client: comparison to healthy controls and relationship to quality of life

Caregiver burden in the veterinary dermatology client: comparison to healthy controls and relationship to quality of life

Validation of an abbreviated instrument to assess veterinary client caregiver burden

Dental Patient Welfare

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About