Skip to main content
. 2018 Nov 28;15(12):2679. doi: 10.3390/ijerph15122679

Table 4.

Factors associated with hours of informal caregiving.

Independent Variables Hours of Informal Caregiving (n = 392)
B (SE) p-Value * 95% CI
Constant 6.715 (2.03) 0.001 (2.74;10.686)
Relation with PwD (Partner/Spouse vs. Other) 0.461 (0.600) 0.443 (−0.716; 1.638)
Informal caregiver working (Yes vs. No) −4.152 (0.553) <0.001 (−5.237; −3.068)
Interaction between Country # Utilization of formal caregiving (Ref. Italy/not using formal caregiving)
 Italy/using formal caregiving −1.874 (0.684) 0.006 (−3.215; −0.533)
 Sweden/not using formal caregiving −2.631 (0.707) <0.001 (−4.017; −1.245)
 Sweden/using formal caregiving −1.078 (0.961) 0.262 (−2.963; 0.805)
IADL scale (1–48)
 23–36 2.794 (0.692) <0.001 (1.436; 4.152)
 37–43 3.273 (0.789) <0.001 (1.725; 4.821)
 44–48 4.655 (0.914) <0.001 (2.863; 6.447)
Living with the PwD (Yes vs. No) −0.001 (0.324) 0.995 (−0.638; 0.634)
ADL scale (one point increase) −0.002 (0.178) 0.990 (−0.351; 0.346)
MMSE score (one point increase) −0.061 (0.109) 0.572 (−0.276; 0.152)
R-squared 0.244
Adjusted R-squared 0.222

Data source: TECH@HOME and UP-TECH questionnaire. ADL, activities of daily living; B (SE), Beta coefficient (standard error); CI, confidence intervals; MMSE, mini mental state examination; PwD, person with dementia. IADL, instrumental activities of daily living. Country of origin: 1 = Sweden, 0 = Italy. Living with the person with dementia: 1 = no, 0 = yes. Utilization of formal caregiver: 1 = yes, 0 = no. Informal caregiver actively working: 1 = yes, 0 = no. * p < 0.05 was regarded as significant; significant p-values are underlined.