Search

Objectives: To describe cancer caregivers' participation in health-promoting behaviors and to identify factors influencing participation., Sample & Setting: 129 informal cancer caregivers at the National Institutes of Health Clinical Center., Methods & Variables: Cross-sectional survey methodology using Health-Promoting Lifestyle Profile-II (HPLP-II), PROMIS® Global Physical Health, NIH Toolbox Stress and Self-Efficacy, Caregiver Reaction Assessment, and Family Care Inventory Mutuality subscale., Results: Caregivers reported the highest HPLP-II subscale scores for spirituality and interpersonal relationships and the lowest for physical activity. Caregivers who were older, with lower body mass indices, in better physical health, and with higher self-efficacy and mutuality participated in more health-promoting behaviors. Sixty percent of the caregivers reported that they exercised less since becoming a caregiver, and 47% reported that their diet was worse., Implications for Nursing: Future research is needed to examine novel interventions to increase health-promoting activities in cancer caregivers, and these interventions might be strengthened by including components that focus on increasing self-efficacy and/or improving the strength of the relationship between the caregiver and care recipient.

Objective: To describe levels of loneliness in cancer caregivers over a 6 month time period, and to examine factors that influence changes in loneliness in caregivers over time., Methods: Prospective, repeated measures design was utilized to examine levels of loneliness and factors that influence loneliness in 129 family caregivers of individuals undergoing cancer treatment at three time points over a 6 month period. Measures included: PROMIS global health and sleep disturbance; NIH Toolbox loneliness, self-efficacy and perceived stress; Family Care Inventory mutuality scale; and Caregiver Reaction Assessment., Results: Approximately one third (30.2%, n = 39) of the caregivers had high levels of loneliness, and levels of loneliness did not change over the three time points (P = .985). For any given time point, caregivers who were not married (P = .008), not working (P = .027), with worse mental health (P = .015), more perceived-stress (P < .0001), and more caregiver burden (P = .003) reported higher levels of loneliness., Conclusion: This study provides guidance for clinicians attempting to identify at-risk caregivers by confirming the findings of previous research that caregivers with higher burden, stress and in poor mental health are at increased risk for loneliness. This study provides preliminary evidence that continuing to work during the caregiving trajectory may be beneficial to caregivers by reducing levels of loneliness. Future research is needed to confirm these findings and to examine novel interventions to reduce loneliness in cancer caregivers., (Published 2020. This article is a U.S. Government work and is in the public domain in the USA.)