Introduction: Caregiving has an association with poorer health outcomes, physical stress and emotional stress, due to caregivers’ predisposition to leave their own basic needs unfulfilled in favor of those of the care recipient. Furthermore, there is an association between caregiving and financial constraints, thus, informal caregivers are more vulnerable to food insecurity. Lastly, it is reasonable to deem that caregivers’ food insecurity, which is often accompanied by a higher emotional burden, might negatively influence their nutritional status and, indirectly, decrease the quality of the care provided.
Objectives: This study aims to characterize informal and formal caregivers’ nutritional status, food insecurity level and caregiver burden, and to study the associations between those three conditions.
Methodology: In this cross-sectional study, data collection was performed through two questionnaires developed by the investigation team, applied on-site and online. Nutritional status was assessed through body mass index (BMI) and the adherence to a healthy diet lifestyle (using the “Brief and initial evaluation of dietary habits” scale). Food insecurity was screened by the scale from the “INFOFAMILIA” project. Caregiver burden was assessed through the four-point Zarit Burden Interview developed to be used in Portugal.
Results: Informal caregivers’ BMI, compared to formal caregivers, was significatively higher (mean = 27.5 kg/m2, SD = 6.7 vs. mean = 24.8, SD 4.3, p = 0.018); nevertheless, this study didn’t find significatively differences concerning their level of adherence to healthy diet patterns (1.4% vs. 0.0% low adherence, p = 0.952). Food insecurity had a higher prevalence among informal caregivers (44.7% vs. 27.1%, p = 0.040) and was predicted by not practicing physical exercise, a higher BMI, the presence of caregiver burden and having intermediate (7 to 9 years) of education. Caregiver burden was more prevalent among informal caregivers (61.7% vs. 20.1%, p < 0.001), and it had two protector factors: literacy level (middle school level) and type of caregiver (formal caregiver). Finally, it wasn’t found a significant relation between caregivers’ weight status and food insecurity (OR = 1.12, 95%CI: 0.52; 2.41) nor between caregivers’ weight status and caregiver burden (OR = 1.40, 95%CI: 0.64; 2.96). However, a higher level of food insecurity was associated to higher caregiver burden score (mean = 6.0, SD = 3.5 vs. mean = 4.5, SD = 3.1, p = 0.007).
Conclusion: Caregivers, in particular the informal ones, exhibited an inadequate nutritional status (concerning their BMI values). Besides, food insecurity and caregiver burden were prevalent among this population. Lastly, caregivers’ weight status, food (in)security and caregiver burden were not related to each other. The present study seems to suggest that people who provide any type of care are a risk group for higher BMI, food insecurity and caregiver burden; nonetheless this is even more noticeable in informal caregivers.
Keywords: Informal Caregivers; Formal Caregivers; Nutritional Status; Food Insecurity; Caregiver Burden
Beatriz Teixeira., et al. “Informal and Formal Caregivers’ Nutritional Status, Food Insecurity and Caregiver Burden”. EC Nutrition  19.7 (2024): 01-12.
© 2024 Beatriz Teixeira., et al. This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author and source are credited.
Open Access by ECronicon is
licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution
4.0 International License
Based on a work at www.ecronicon.net