Table 1.
Descriptive Results of Baseline Caregiver Characteristics and Caregiver Outcomes by Rurality
| Variables | All Caregivers (N=414) |
Urban (N=350) |
Rural (N=64) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| |||
| N(%) or Mean(SD) |
N(%) or Mean(SD) |
N(%) or Mean(SD) |
|
| Caregiver Characteristics+ | |||
|
| |||
| Age | 66.5 (12.5) | 66.4 (12.2) | 66.9 (13.7) |
| Non-Hispanic White | 369 (89.1%) | 310 (88.6%) | 59 (92.2%) |
| Female | 310 (74.9%) | 264 (75.4%) | 46 (71.9%) |
| Education ≥ some college‡ | 263 (63.5%) | 232 (66.3%) | 31 (48.4%) |
| Incomes ≥ $50,000 or decline to answer | 259 (62.6%) | 221 (63.1%) | 38 (59.4%) |
| Married or cohabiting partnership | 335 (80.9%) | 282 (80.6%) | 53 (82.8%) |
| Employed | 105 (25.4%) | 91 (26.0%) | 14 (21.9%) |
| Relationship with patient | |||
| Spouse and cohabiting partner | 276 (66.7%) | 231 (66.0%) | 45 (70.3%) |
| Son/daughter | 94 (22.7%) | 83 (23.7%) | 11 (17.2%) |
| Other | 41 (9.9%) | 34 (9.7%) | 7 (10.9%) |
| ComorbidityŠ | 162 (39.1%) | 134 (38.3%) | 28 (43.8%) |
|
| |||
| Caregiver outcomes | |||
|
| |||
| RYFF environmental mastery(7-35)§ | 27.6 (4.6) | 27.6 (4.6) | 27.1 (4.6) |
| Caregiver Reaction Assessment (1-5) | |||
| Self-esteem§ | 4.5 (0.5) | 4.5 (0.5) | 4.5 (0.5) |
| Disrupted schedule¶ | 2.6 (0.8) | 2.6 (0.8) | 2.6 (0.7) |
| Finance problems¶ | 2.0 (0.8) | 1.9 (0.8) | 2.1 (0.9) |
| Lack of social support¶ | 1.8 (0.7) | 1.8 (0.7) | 1.9 (0.7) |
| Health problems¶ | 1.9 (0.7) | 1.9 (0.7) | 2.0 (0.6) |
Note: SD=standard deviation;
+
Three caregivers had missing demographic data;
‡
P ≤ 0.05 when comparing differences between urban and rural caregivers using t-tests for continuous variables, and Chi-square tests for binary variables;
Š
Comorbidity is defined as having 3 comorbidities or 1 comorbidity with great interference;
§
Higher number indicates better caregiver outcome;
¶
Higher number indicates worse caregiver outcome.