Continuity of care, residence, and family burden in Ohio.
Family and client data from the RWJF initiative in three Ohio cities are linked. The distribution of burden for a sample of 305 family members is reported. Burden is measured by assistance with the activities of daily living, attempts to prevent or stop troublesome behaviors, and worries about the client. The impact of continuity of care is evaluated for the total sample and in interaction with shared residence. Although continuity has no direct effect on any measure of burden, it can offset the objective burdens associated with shared residence. Without continuity of care, coresidence tends to increase the burden of caregiving and supervision. Client involvement in the professional system of care has less impact on family members when the client lives apart. The objective burden falls most heavily on spouses and parents; adult children and secondary kin are less affected.
Tessler
R
R
Social and Demographic Research Institute, University of Massachusetts, Amherst 01003.
Gamache
G
G
D000328:Adult; D017028:Caregivers; D002908:Chronic Disease / Q000191:economics; D003156:Community Mental Health Services / Q000458:organization & administration*; D003266:Continuity of Patient Care / Q000458:organization & administration*; D017281:Cost of Illness; D005190:Family / Q000523:psychology; D005260:Female; D005381:Financing, Organized; D005582:Foundations; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D001523:Mental Disorders / Q000191:economics / Q000628:therapy; D008875:Middle Aged; D009820:Ohio; D011368:Professional-Family Relations