Content provided in partnership with

Health Care Industry

Changing Family Needs After Brain Injury

Journal of Rehabilitation, Oct-Dec, 1998 by Peter Stebbins, Paul Leung

<< Page 1 Continued from page 3. Previous | Next

Instrument: The instrument used was the Family Needs Questionnaire (FNQ) developed by Kreutzer (1988). The reliability and validity (both content and construct) of the FNQ have been established by Camplair and Kreutzer (1989) and Serio, Kreutzer, and Witol (1997).

Two minor changes were made to the FNQ for this study. The category "Not Applicable" (NA) was added, creating a four-point scale (NA, met, partly met, not met). NA was added to allow response regarded as not relevant to their current situation. The term `patient' was also changed to read `my relative.' Accompanying the FNQ was a demographic data sheet requesting information on the time since injury and the respondent's relationship to their ABI relative (i.e., spouse, parent, etc.).

Most Popular Articles in Health: Fuel your workout: exercisers who eat before they work out have more energy ...; Soothe a dry, itchy scalp: 5 easy expert solutions; Cocktails and calories: Beer, wine and liquor calories can really add up. ...; The sour truth about apple cider vinegar - evaluation of therapeutic use; The, six best supplements you've never heard of: these secret weapons can ...; More »

Procedure: Key workers from the support groups, community access, and independent living skill programs were asked to identify family members of ABI individuals currently involved in their service/agency and then distribute the family needs questionnaire to those family members who were interested in participating in the study. Relatives receiving the questionnaire were asked to return the questionnaire using a pre-paid, pre-addressed envelope. Thirty-five questionnaires were distributed with 29 returned for a response rate of 83%.

Results

The 29 returned questionnaires were divided into two groups based on duration of time since injury. Group I consisted of 8 respondents/family members who were living with and/or caring for a brain-injured relative during the first two years post trauma (N = 8, Mean = 1.28 years, SD = 0.5049, Var.=0.265, Range = 1.2 (0.6- 1.8)).

Group 2 consisted of 21 respondents/family members who were living with and/or caring for a brain-injured relative beyond the first two years post trauma (N = 21, Mean = 15.94 years, SD = 8.98, Variance = 80.72, Range = 25.10 (2.8 - 27.9)).

Rank Ordering Of Needs

The results of the two groups were rank-ordered to address the question of the needs of relatives caring for family members with brain injury beyond two years post-injury experience, and whether the needs differ in importance and degree to which they are met.

Items from the FNQ were ranked for each of the two groups (Group 1, 0-2 yrs post; Group 2, 2+ yrs post) to determine the relative importance of individual needs and the extent to which these needs were perceived as met. Table 1 lists the top 20 needs for Group 1 rated "Important/Very Important" as well as the degree to which each need was perceived as being met. Table 2 lists the top 20 needs for Group 2 rated "Important/Very Important" as well as providing information about the degree to which each need was perceived as being met.

Table 1. Group 1 (0-2 years post injury n=8) FNQ top twenty reported needs Important/Very Important and the degree to which they were rated Met

Health Care Industry

Changing Family Needs After Brain Injury

Journal of Rehabilitation, Oct-Dec, 1998 by Peter Stebbins, Paul Leung

Find Research Guides for:

Find Featured Titles for: Sports

Most Popular Articles in Health

Most Popular Publications in Health