居家照護病患之主要照顧者正負向照顧經驗及其相關因素之探討

本研究目的為（1）探討主要照顧者之正負向照顧經驗；（2）探討主要照顧者正負向照顧經驗的重要預測因子。採橫斷性、描述性相關性研究設計，以接受健保居家照護病患之主要照顧者為研究對象，採結構式問卷調查，利用醫學中心及區域醫院型態附設之居家護理所各一家共收案120位。問卷內容包括：主要照顧者個人屬性、健康狀況、家庭功能疾病和疾病狀況、照顧反應等量表，其中照顧反應量表分別測量正負向照顧經驗。量表經信度及效度檢定，包括內在一致性Cronbach’s α值.80∼.91、專家內容效度與表面效度。研究結果發現:（1）研究對象正向照顧經驗平均得分為3.71±0.60，負向照顧經驗平均得分為2.60±0.42，顯於提供病患照顧時，感受到正向及負向的照顧經驗；（2）正向照顧經驗中，得分最高為以「我真的願意照顧病人」；以「我怨嘆必須照顧病人」的得分最低；（3）負向照顧經驗中，以「時間的安排」得分最高；得分最低為「缺乏家人支持」；（4）正向照顧經驗之重要預測因子依次為健康狀況、家庭功能、與病人之情感關係，共可解釋26.6%之變異量；（5）負向照顧經驗之重要預測因子依次為健康狀況、每週協助照顧事項頻率，共可解釋34.0%之變異量。

關鍵字

居家照護病患之主要照顧者；健康狀況；家庭功能；照顧經驗

並列摘要

The purpose of this study were (1) to explore the primary caregivers to take care of the positive and negative experiences; (2) to explore the main caregivers to take care of the positive and negative experiences of the important predictors. Cross-sectional, descriptive correlational design to receive health insurance home care patients the primary caregivers for the study, a structured questionnaire, the use of medical centers and regional hospitals attached to the type of home care by a total income of all Case 120. The questionnaire included: primary caregiver personal attributes, health status, family functioning diseases and disease conditions, to take care of reaction scale, which scales to take care of reactions were measured to take care of the positive and negative experiences. Scale reliability and validity by the test, including the internal consistency Cronbach's α value of .80 ~ .91, expert content validity and face validity. The results showed: (1) study the experience to take care of the average score of positive 3.71 ± 0.60, a negative experience to take care of the average score of 2.60 ± 0.42, shown on the provision of patient care, their positive and negative feel to the experience of care ; (2) positive care experience, the highest score for the "I really want to care for the patient"; to "I complain to take care of the patient" and the lowest scores; (3) to take care of negative experience with "timing" with the highest scores; the lowest scores for the "lack of family support"e care of negative experience with "timing" the highest average score, on the lowest scores was "lack of family support"; (4) positive experiences in taking care of the significant predictors followed by health, family functioning, and the patient's emotional relationship, a total of 26.6% of the variance explained; (5) negative experiences in taking care of the important predictors of health status was followed by a week to help take care of matters of frequency, 34.0% of the total explained variance.