Skip to main content
. 2020 Apr 21;19:51. doi: 10.1186/s12904-020-00560-x

Table 2.

Characteristics of study participants (n = 41)

n (%)
Sex (female) 35 (85.4)
Age [range 26–81] (M, SD) 61.1 (±12.5)
Educational level (primary, secondary, tertiary) 5 (12.2)/ 12 (29.3)/ 24 (58.5)
Cultural background
 Dutch (native) 31 (75.6)
 Non-Dutch (Western) 6 (14.6)
 Non-Dutch (non-Western) 4 (9.8)
Has provided family care in the past 26 (63.7)
Currently provides family care 15 (36.3)
Provides/provided care for
 Partner 20 (48.8)
 Parent 16 (39)
 Other 5 (12.2)
Type of illness
 Cancer 16 (39)
 Dementia 16 (39)
 Organ failure 13 (31.7)
 Stroke (CVA) 5 (12.2)
 Other a 8 (19.5)
Contact frequency with care recipient
 Lives in same house 23 (56.1)
 Daily contact 16 (39)
 Weekly contact 2 (4.9)
Received support from
 Own network 28 (68.3)
 Home-care staff 30 (73.2)
 Volunteers 6 (14.6)
 Other b 5 (12.2)
 No support 2 (4.9)
Paid work when family care started (yes) 23 (56.1)
Work hours per week [range 10–66] (M, SD) 32.2 (±12.7)
Adjusted work situation because of family care (yes) c 14 (60.9)
 Quit job 10 (43.5)
 Work adjustments d 7 (30.4)
 Care/sick leave 4 (17.4)

Note: a Other diseases or problems that were mentioned included progressive neurologic disorder, prolapse, dehydration, urinary infection, delirium, open wounds, multiple falling accidents and posttraumatic stress disorder (war trauma). b Other support included dementia support groups, case managers and privately paid caregivers. c Percentage of working family caregivers. d Work adjustments included reduced working hours, flexible working hours and working from home