Table 4.

Descriptions and ANOVA analysis of FRAS-C and APGAR scores in the five clusters(N = 281 dyads)

Variables		Cluster 1(n = 52)		Cluster 2(n = 29)		Cluster 3(n = 130)		Cluster 4(n = 32)		Cluster 5(n = 38)		F	P
		M ± SD	Rank	M ± SD	Rank	M ± SD	Rank	M ± SD	Rank	M ± SD	Rank
FCPS	Patient	61.33 ± 7.56	4c	67.00 ± 11.03	2b	62.21 ± 7.94	3c	83.91 ± 6.58	1a	41.29 ± 8.18	5d	165.632	< 0.001
	Caregiver	62.5 ± 5.73	5c	83.17 ± 5.61	1a	68.29 ± 2.96	2b	68.22 ± 4.56	3b, c	65.24 ± 5.70	4c	159.384	< 0.001
USR	Patient	7.63 ± 1.70	3b	8.21 ± 1.72	2b	7.58 ± 1.36	4b	10.34 ± 1.49	1a	5.47 ± 1.86	5c	122.437	< 0.001
	Caregiver	7.08 ± 0.97	5c	10.55 ± 1.21	1a	8.78 ± 0.61	2b	8.28 ± 1.20	4b	8.29 ± 0.98	3b	106.303	< 0.001
MPO	Patient	17.73 ± 1.99	3b	18.52 ± 2.13	2b	17.25 ± 1.78	4b	22.59 ± 1.50	1a	10.08 ± 2.75	5c	43.595	< 0.001
	Caregiver	16.69 ± 1.63	5c	23.14 ± 0.99	1a	18.36 ± 1.25	3b	18.56 ± 1.61	2b	17.53 ± 1.98	4b, c	76.208	< 0.001
Total score	Patient	86.69 ± 9.08	4c	93.72 ± 14.02	2b	87.04 ± 9.05	3c	116.84 ± 8.54	1a	56.84 ± 10.79	5d	185.490	< 0.001
	Caregiver	86.27 ± 6.34	5d	116.86 ± 6.58	1a	95.43 ± 3.46	2b	95.06 ± 5.54	3b, c	91.05 ± 7.75	4c	97.63	< 0.001
Difference Score	Patient-Caregiver	0.42 ± 10.83	5e	−23.14 ± 14.40	2b	−8.39 ± 9.73	4d	21.78 ± 10.69	3c	−34.21 ± 13.17	1a	131.724	< 0.001
APGAR	Patient	4.73 ± 2.16	4c	6.21 ± 2.02	2b	5.52 ± 2.53	3c, b	8.78 ± 0.87	1a	2.18 ± 1.41	5d	43.297	< 0.001
	Caregiver	4.5 ± 2.55	5c	8.07 ± 1.36	1a	6.09 ± 2.27	2b	5.81 ± 2.56	3b, c	5.32 ± 2.12	4b, c	12.451	< 0.001

FRAS-C The Family Resilience Assessment Scale(Chinese Version), FCPS Family Communication and Problem Solving, USR Utilizing Social Resources, MPO Maintaining a Positive Outlook, APGAR Family Concern Index Questionnaire, M Mean, SD standard deviation

Values were ranked from the highest to the lowest.Differences in post hoc analysis were represented by the following order: a > b > c > d > e, P < 0.05