Collective caregivers: A novel examination of health literacy management approaches

Family Communication in Autism Spectrum Disorder: Applying the Family Caregiver Communication Typology to Parent Caregivers

Parents of children with Autism Spectrum Disorder (ASD) experience greater stress and caregiver burden than parents of children with other disabilities. To cope with the stress of long-term caregiving, they rely on professionals for support and guidance. However, parents continue to report unmet communication and support needs. To inform tailored communication for parents of a child with ASD, this study used the existing Family Caregiver Communication Typology framework which identifies four caregiver communication types (manager, carrier, partner, and lone) and their unique communication and support needs. In-depth, structured interviews were conducted with parents (n = 22) and ASD professionals (n = 28) to explore communication characteristics of ASD parent caregivers. A thematic analysis revealed communication behaviors among four ASD parent caregiver types, further validating the typology. Future research is needed to develop targeted interventions for improving family-centered care based on ASD parent caregiver types.

Exploring Differences in Caregiver Communication in Serious Illness

Background: Demographic factors, such as disease context and family relationships, are communication mediators and moderators; however, little is known about how understanding these factors can improve caregiver communication with providers. Recognition of communication differences among caregivers may aid the development of approaches to improve serious illness communication. Objective: To explore whether caregiver communication differs by disease context (cancer vs. dementia) and caregiver communication type (Manager, Carrier, Partner, and Lone). Caregiver communication type is based on communication patterns between the care recipient and caregiver. Design and Measurements: Caregivers of persons with cancer and/or dementia were surveyed from a U.S. national research registry website. Measures of caregiver communication included information needs, communication confidence, perception of provider understanding of the caregiver, perceived frequency of caregiver assessment, and caregiver stress. Analysis of variance (ANOVA) determined significant differences between caregiver communication (p < 0.05) based on disease context and caregiver communication type. Results: Cancer caregivers reported higher unrecognized-demanded information states (i.e., not recognizing information was needed), more communication confidence, and more frequent caregiver assessment compared to dementia caregivers. Among caregiver communication types, Manager caregiver types were more confident communicating than other caregiver types and perceived greater understanding by providers than the Lone caregiver type. Manager caregivers reported significantly less stress than other caregiver communication types. Conclusions: Understanding disease context and caregiver communication type may help improve caregiver communication with health care providers.