Impact of dual caregiving on well-being and loneliness among ever-married women in Japan: A pre- and post-COVID-19 pandemic comparison

Makiko Kawabe , Yoko Moriyama , Takehiro Sugiyama , Nanako Tamiya
{"title":"Impact of dual caregiving on well-being and loneliness among ever-married women in Japan: A pre- and post-COVID-19 pandemic comparison","authors":"Makiko Kawabe ,&nbsp;Yoko Moriyama ,&nbsp;Takehiro Sugiyama ,&nbsp;Nanako Tamiya","doi":"10.1016/j.aggp.2024.100101","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><div>The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted people involved in a combination of childcare and elderly care (dual caregivers). As their number is expected to rise in some countries, there remains limited research on the impact of the pandemic on their well-being and loneliness.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>We utilized repeated cross-sectional data from a large internet survey conducted between 2019 and 2021 to examine the association between informal caregiving status (no care, childcare only, elderly care only, and dual care) and the deterioration of well-being and loneliness among married women aged 20–59.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>In 2019, the total sample size was 7,357 (60 dual care, 3,630 elderly care only, 3,470 childcare only, and 3,197 no care). In 2021, the sample comprised 6,645 (77 dual care, 3,164 elderly care only, 148 childcare only, and 3,256 no care). In 2019, the adjusted odds ratio (95 % confidence interval [CI]) for lower well-being and higher loneliness in informal caregiving statuses (childcare only, elderly care only, and dual care) compared to no care was 1.38 (1.03–1.86), significant only for elderly care only. In 2021, elderly care only remained significant, with an odds ratio of 1.84 (1.15–2.97), while dual care was associated with lower well-being (1.55 (1.11–2.20) and higher loneliness (2.08 (1.24–3.49).</div></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><div>Our study found that dual caregivers experienced greater declines in well-being and increased loneliness following the pandemic than non-caregivers. This highlights the importance of enhancing support for dual caregivers during current and future crises to prevent worsening well-being and loneliness.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":100119,"journal":{"name":"Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics Plus","volume":"1 4","pages":"Article 100101"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Archives of Gerontology and Geriatrics Plus","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2950307824000985","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background

The COVID-19 pandemic has significantly impacted people involved in a combination of childcare and elderly care (dual caregivers). As their number is expected to rise in some countries, there remains limited research on the impact of the pandemic on their well-being and loneliness.

Methods

We utilized repeated cross-sectional data from a large internet survey conducted between 2019 and 2021 to examine the association between informal caregiving status (no care, childcare only, elderly care only, and dual care) and the deterioration of well-being and loneliness among married women aged 20–59.

Results

In 2019, the total sample size was 7,357 (60 dual care, 3,630 elderly care only, 3,470 childcare only, and 3,197 no care). In 2021, the sample comprised 6,645 (77 dual care, 3,164 elderly care only, 148 childcare only, and 3,256 no care). In 2019, the adjusted odds ratio (95 % confidence interval [CI]) for lower well-being and higher loneliness in informal caregiving statuses (childcare only, elderly care only, and dual care) compared to no care was 1.38 (1.03–1.86), significant only for elderly care only. In 2021, elderly care only remained significant, with an odds ratio of 1.84 (1.15–2.97), while dual care was associated with lower well-being (1.55 (1.11–2.20) and higher loneliness (2.08 (1.24–3.49).

Conclusions

Our study found that dual caregivers experienced greater declines in well-being and increased loneliness following the pandemic than non-caregivers. This highlights the importance of enhancing support for dual caregivers during current and future crises to prevent worsening well-being and loneliness.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
双重照顾对日本已婚女性幸福感和孤独感的影响:covid -19大流行前后的比较
COVID-19大流行对儿童保育和老年人护理(双重照顾者)的人产生了重大影响。由于在一些国家,这一数字预计会上升,但关于这一流行病对他们的福祉和孤独感的影响的研究仍然有限。方法利用2019年至2021年进行的一项大型网络调查的重复横断面数据,研究20-59岁已婚女性的非正式照顾状况(无照顾、只照顾儿童、只照顾老人和双重照顾)与幸福感恶化和孤独感之间的关系。结果2019年,总样本量为7357人,其中双重护理60人、老年护理3630人、托儿护理3470人、无护理3197人。到2021年,样本包括6645个(77个双重护理,3164个只照顾老人,148个只照顾儿童,3256个不照顾)。2019年,与没有护理相比,非正式护理状态(仅托儿、仅老年人护理和双重护理)较低的幸福感和较高的孤独感的调整优势比(95%置信区间[CI])为1.38(1.03-1.86),仅在老年人护理中具有显著性。2021年,只有老年人护理仍然显著,比值比为1.84(1.15-2.97),而双重护理与较低的幸福感(1.55(1.11-2.20)和较高的孤独感(2.08(1.24-3.49)相关。一项研究发现,与非照顾者相比,双重照顾者在大流行后幸福感下降幅度更大,孤独感增加。这突出了在当前和未来危机期间加强对双重照顾者的支持的重要性,以防止福祉和孤独感恶化。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Impact of dual caregiving on well-being and loneliness among ever-married women in Japan: A pre- and post-COVID-19 pandemic comparison Dance programme for older adults with pre-frailty: A mixed-methods feasibility study Ferritin at admission as a prognostic marker in older adults hospitalized for COVID-19: A retrospective cohort study Negative attitudes toward the majority and perceived hostile and modern prejudices: Focus on older adults and people with disabilities Cognitive decline gap between male and female in Indian context: Examining the contribution of underlying factors using non-linear decomposition analysis
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1