An Indian Adaptation of the Involvement Evaluation Questionnaire: Similarities and Differences in Assessment of Caregiver Burden

By Grover, S.; Chakrabarti, S. et al. | East Asian Archives of Psychiatry, December 2011 | Go to article overview

An Indian Adaptation of the Involvement Evaluation Questionnaire: Similarities and Differences in Assessment of Caregiver Burden


Grover, S., Chakrabarti, S., Ghormode, D., Dutt, A., Kate, N., Kulhara, P., East Asian Archives of Psychiatry


[TEXT NOT REPRODUCIBLE IN ASCII]

Introduction

Caregiver burden has been defined by Platt as "the presence of problems, difficulties or adverse events which affect the life (lives) of the psychiatric patient's significant others (e.g. members of the household and / or the family)". (1) Over the past 5 or 6 decades, research on caregiver burden has progressed from simple enumeration of problems faced to more elaborative and conceptually driven exploratory studies. (2) Newer conceptual models such as the stress-appraisal-coping paradigm, the role theory, and the systems approach have been applied to examine the experience of caregiving and different facets of the caregiver burden. (3)

The number of different instruments to assess caregiver burden has also increased several folds in recent years. While earlier reviews on this subject had identified about 2 dozens of such scales, (1,3) a recent systematic review yielded 74 different instruments with adequate psychometric properties, which had been used to measure caregiver burden. (4) These scales differed in terms of their format (interview vs. self-report), purpose (generic vs. specific scales for individual disorders), and content (covering all areas of burden vs. focusing on 1 area, e.g. economic burden). (1,3-5) Although many of these scales have been translated into other languages, 2 of them, viz. the Zarit Burden Interview and the Involvement Evaluation Questionnaire (IEQ) have undergone the most extensive testing for their cross-cultural applicability. (4,6-8) The Zarit Burden Interview is a self-report scale that has more commonly targeted caregivers of patients with dementia, while the IEQ has more often been used in caregivers of those with schizophrenia or mood disorders. (4,9)

India has a long history of burden research, with several studies carried out among family caregivers in different parts of the country at various points in time. (10) Devised by Pai and Kapur, (11) the Family Burden Interview (FBI) Schedule has been the instrument most commonly used to assess caregiver burden. This scale was based on the traditional distinction between objective and subjective burden, wherein objective burden refers to the objective / tangible consequences of the patient's illness on the family, while the caregiver's own perception of the impact of caring is referred to as subjective burden. (12) However, the categorisation of burden into objective and subjective aspects has been criticised on the grounds that these overlapping dimensions are difficult to operationalise and assess. (13) Moreover, the primary focus of the FBI Schedule is on objective burden, and its assessment of subjective burden is relatively inadequate. (1) Finally, although the FBI Schedule has been used in developing countries quite often, its psychometric properties have seldom been examined. (1,14,15)

In contrast to the FBI, the IEQ is based on the stress-appraisal-coping model of caregiver burden, which is one of the dominant paradigms for conceptualising such burden. (4,7,9) The IEQ was developed to assess caregiver burden or the 'consequences of caregiving' (a more neutral term for burden preferred by the authors). It relies on the caregiver's perceptions to assess burden without distinguishing between its objective and subjective aspects. The IEQ has been extensively tested and has proved to be a comprehensive, conceptually valid, and reliable means of determining the consequences of providing care for a mentally ill family member. (7,9) The instrument has also been translated into several European languages. Cross-cultural applicability of some of these versions was examined in 5 different European sites as a component of the European Psychiatric Services: Inputs Linked to Outcome Domains and Needs (EPSILON) study. (7,9,16) Although the internal consistency, test-retest reliability, and factorial validity of the instrument were satisfactory in a majority of these sites, (9) the results often varied (possibly due to sociocultural differences). …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

An Indian Adaptation of the Involvement Evaluation Questionnaire: Similarities and Differences in Assessment of Caregiver Burden
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Welcome to the new Questia Reader

The Questia Reader has been updated to provide you with an even better online reading experience.  It is now 100% Responsive, which means you can read our books and articles on any sized device you wish.  All of your favorite tools like notes, highlights, and citations are still here, but the way you select text has been updated to be easier to use, especially on touchscreen devices.  Here's how:

1. Click or tap the first word you want to select.
2. Click or tap the last word you want to select.

OK, got it!

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.