IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/socmed/v48y1999i9p1259-1269.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Measuring both negative and positive reactions to giving care to cancer patients: psychometric qualities of the Caregiver Reaction Assessment (CRA)

Author

Listed:
  • Nijboer, Chris
  • Triemstra, Mattanja
  • Tempelaar, Reike
  • Sanderman, Robbert
  • van den Bos, Geertrudis A. M.

Abstract

The Caregiver Reaction Assessment Scale (CRA) is an instrument designed to assess specific aspects of the caregiving situation, including both negative and positive dimensions of caregiving reactions. This paper addresses the psychometric qualities of the CRA in a multicenter study among partners of colorectal cancer patients (n=181). No problems in feasibility were observed. Five dimensions of caregiver reactions were identified through exploratory factor analysis: the impact of caregiving on disrupted schedule, financial problems, lack of family support, health problems and the impact of caregiving on caregiver's self-esteem. Reliability analyses showed that standardized Cronbach's [alpha]'s varied between 0.62 and 0.83 for the separate subscales, indicating sufficient internal consistencies. Construct validity was supported. The CRA proves to be a feasible, reliable and valid instrument for assessing both negative and positive reactions to caregiving among partners of patients with cancer.

Suggested Citation

  • Nijboer, Chris & Triemstra, Mattanja & Tempelaar, Reike & Sanderman, Robbert & van den Bos, Geertrudis A. M., 1999. "Measuring both negative and positive reactions to giving care to cancer patients: psychometric qualities of the Caregiver Reaction Assessment (CRA)," Social Science & Medicine, Elsevier, vol. 48(9), pages 1259-1269, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:48:y:1999:i:9:p:1259-1269
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0277-9536(98)00426-2
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Petter Sandstedt & Susanne Littorin & Gunilla Cröde Widsell & Sverker Johansson & Kristina Gottberg & Charlotte Ytterberg & Mariann Olsson & Lotta Widén Holmqvist & Marie Kierkegaard, 2018. "Caregiver experience, health‐related quality of life and life satisfaction among informal caregivers to patients with amyotrophic lateral sclerosis: A cross‐sectional study," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 27(23-24), pages 4321-4330, December.
    2. Jan Cameron & David R Thompson & Dion Szer & Johanna Greig & Chantal F Ski, 2017. "Dyadic incongruence in chronic heart failure: Implications for patient and carer psychological health and self‐care," Journal of Clinical Nursing, John Wiley & Sons, vol. 26(23-24), pages 4804-4812, December.
    3. Kira S. Van Hof & Arta Hoesseini & Maarten C. Dorr & Irma M. Verdonck-de Leeuw & Femke Jansen & C. René Leemans & Robert P. Takes & Chris H. J. Terhaard & Robert Jan Baatenburg de Jong & Aniel Sewnaik, 2022. "Caregiver Burden, Psychological Distress and Quality of Life among Informal Caregivers of Patients with Head and Neck Cancer: A Longitudinal Study," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 19(23), pages 1-15, December.
    4. Hannah Weyer-Wendl & Peter Walter, 2016. "Financial burden and quality of life of informal caregivers of patients with wet age-related macular degeneration," Health Economics Review, Springer, vol. 6(1), pages 1-10, December.
    5. Liuna Geng & Jian Wang & Liping Cheng & Binbin Zhang & Hui Shen, 2019. "Mindful Learning Improves Positive Feelings of Cancer Patients’ Family Caregivers," IJERPH, MDPI, vol. 16(2), pages 1-9, January.
    6. Monica Eriksson & Mia M. T. Wennerberg & Solveig M. Lundgren & Ella Danielson, 2017. "“Self-Employed” in Caregivinghood: The Contribution of Swedish Informal Caregivers’ Environmental and Contextual Resistance Resources and Deficits," Societies, MDPI, vol. 7(3), pages 1-19, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:socmed:v:48:y:1999:i:9:p:1259-1269. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.elsevier.com/wps/find/journaldescription.cws_home/315/description#description .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.