Vitalis Iwuchukwu

RESEARCH QUESTIONNAIRE VALIDITY The Pearson Correlation Test was used to test for the validity and reliability of the research questions in the questionnaire. As a result, the correct data will be determining the truthfulness of the results of the research quality. Due to the number of questions in the questionnaire, a few of the questions were selected for this test. Interpretation of Results of Pearson Correlation Usually, if the significance value < 0.05, then the instrument of test is declared invalid and if it is greater than 0.05, then the instrument is declared valid. Based on the output in the correlation table in Table 1, the correlation value between items show that most of the significant values (2-tailed) are above 5% (>0.05) while N is the total number of respondents (29). As such, it can be deduced that the questionnaire is valid and reliable. Table1: Correlations How was the first manifestation of How was the first manifestation Pearson Correlation of this sickness? Sig. (2-tailed) What was your first reaction? Pearson Correlation How are you handling such behaviours? What kind of support mechanisms do you have? Are such support mechanisms this sickness? N Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N Pearson Correlation available from the government? Sig. (2-tailed) What are the reactions and attitudes of people towards your sick loved one? N Pearson Correlation Sig. (2-tailed) N a. Cannot be computed because at least one of the variables is constant. 1 29 .276 .147 29 How are you What was your first reaction? .276 .147 29 behaviours? .271 .155 29 Are such support mechanisms do available from the mechanisms you have? .017 .932 29 .524 . 29 29 29 29 .680 . .122 .122 1 -.080 29 29 .123 -.080 29 29 29 29 . . 29 .524 . a . 29 .680 . a 29 1 . a 29 . a . 29 . a .157 . .108 -.270 29 29 29 29 .578 . a 29 -.067 .729 . a 29 .323 .088 . 29 .017 . . a .123 29 . government? .294 29 a attitudes of 1 .294 .932 reactions and What kind of support handling such .271 .155 What are the . a 29 people towards your sick loved one? .323 .088 29 -.067 .729 29 .108 .578 29 -.270 .157 29 . a . 29 1 29 STAGE ONE: HOW CAN FAMILY CARERS DEAL WITH THEIR RELATIVES SUFFERING FROM DEMENTIA? Frequency Test: We determine how family carers discovered that a family member had dementia The table below is a descriptive statistics table that shows how members with dementia were discovered. Out of the 29 respondents, 34.5% discovered through medical diagnosis while 65.5% observed behavioral changes. As such, it clear to deduce that the carers deductions were right about dementia. Table 2: How did you discover it was dementia? Valid Frequency Medical diagnosis 10 Mere observation of behavioral changes Total Percent 34.5 Cumulative Valid Percent Percent 34.5 19 65.5 65.5 29 100.0 100.0 34.5 100.0 Hypothesis Question 1 Null Hypothesis (H0): Caring for a dementia patient does not affect the health of caregivers Alternative Hypothesis (H1): Caring for a dementia patient affects the health of caregivers The null hypothesis was tested using the T-Test. A significant value of more than 5% rejects the null hypothesis. Table 3: Paired Samples Correlations Pair 1 How are you handling the situation since you discovered it? & Did your physical health deteriorate N Correlation 29 .127 Sig. .513 because of the caregiving? Result Interpretation Table 3 tries to determine the handling a dementia patient affects the 29 carers that were considered. Looking at the significant value, it gives a value of 51.3% and this is very significant to ensure that the H0 is accepted. From the Paired Samples Test in Table 4, the mean is 1.586. This indicates that most of the caregivers had shoulder and back pains, and as well felt exhausted (fatigued) during caregiving to dementia patients. The last column shows a sig. value of a 2-tailed test and it will not be used because both variables have more than two options. Table 4: Paired Samples Test Paired Differences Pair 1 How are you handling the situation since you discovered it? - Did your physical health deteriorate because of the Mean 1.586 Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean 3.333 95% Confidence Interval of the Lower .619 Difference .318 Upper t 2.854 df 2.563 Sig. (2-tailed) 28 caregiving? Conclusion The study found that taking care of relatives with dementia has a significant effect of caregivers (.513 or 51.3%). It was also realized that most of the caregivers had pains (back or shoulder) and get exhausted in the process of caregiving. Hypothesis Question 2: H0: Sufficient knowledge of dementia does not affect ways of handling it H1: Sufficient knowledge of dementia affects ways of handling it .016 Using the Paired Samples Statistics test, study showed that the mean of those with sufficient knowledge is 1.0. This implies that none of the respondents has sufficient knowledge about the sickness. The mean of how to handle the sickness is 4.83 and based on the categories used, this falls between encouragement, basic care, regular checkup and medications. Table 5: Paired Samples Statistics Pair 1 sufficiently knowledge how to deal with the person’s unusual behaviour? How are you handling the situation since you discovered it? Mean N Std. Deviation Std. Error Mean 1.00 29 .000 .000 4.83 29 2.713 .504 Next is to determine how significantly that one variable determines the other. This is shown in the Paired Samples Test in Table 5 below. From the test, it is obvious that the 2-tailed sig. value is 0.000. Table 5: Paired Samples Test Paired Differences Pair 1 sufficiently knowledge how to deal with the person’s unusual behaviour? - How are you handling the situation since you Mean -3.828 Std. Deviation 2.713 Std. Error Mean .504 95% Confidence Interval of the Lower Difference -4.860 Upper -2.795 t -7.597 df Sig. (2-tailed) 28 discovered it? Conclusion The study shows a significant value of 0.000. Since the 5% level was not attained, it shows that there is no significant effect of how much knowledge the caregivers have to how they handle the situation of taking care of dementia patients. STAGE TWO: WHICH REQUIREMENTS FOR THE TRAINING OF FAMILY CAREGIVERS HAVE TO BE OBSERVED? Frequency Test Knowledge of Sickness: This first test was to determine how knowledgeable the caregivers were about the sickness. From the analysis performed, 18 respondents (62.1%) had no knowledge of sickness while 11 (37.9%) had little knowledge. This shows that majority of the caregivers handled their patients without any prior knowledge of what dementia is or how to handle it. .000 Table 6: Indicate your knowledge about this sickness? Valid None Frequency 18 Little 11 Total 29 Percent 62.1 37.9 100.0 Cumulative Valid Percent Percent 62.1 37.9 62.1 100.0 100.0 Support Mechanism: The study shows that the support mechanism given to caregivers was majorly from family members (62.1%) while relatives (17.2%) also showed support in different ways. In all of these support mechanisms, the government played no part as the study shows (Table 8). Table 7: What kind of support mechanisms do you have? Valid Therapy Family members Relatives Paid staff NGO None Total Frequency 1 Percent 3.4 Valid Percent 3.4 Cumulative Percent 62.1 62.1 65.5 1 3.4 3.4 86.2 2 2 29 17.2 6.9 6.9 100.0 17.2 6.9 6.9 100.0 government? 3.4 18 5 Table 8: Are such support mechanisms available from the 82.8 93.1 100.0 Valid No Frequency 29 Percent 100.0 Valid Percent 100.0 Cumulative Percent 100.0 Needed Support: Out of the 29 respondents, 65.5% of the needed financial aid, 10.3% wanted training for the caregivers, 5% and 2% wanted home for the old and health insurance respectively. As such, this study shows that most of the caregivers will need financial support to help them take care of the sick relatives effectively. Table 9: What kind of support will you want/ think will help you? Valid Financial Aid Frequency 19 Training for caregivers 3 Home for the old 5 Health Insurance 2 Total 29 Percent - 6.9 100.0 Valid Percent 65.5 Cumulative Percent 10.3 65.5 75.9 17.2 93.1 6.9 100.0 100.0 People’s Reaction to Patient: The study clearly defines that most of the patients were isolated by people (41.4%). Few were stigmatized (17.2) and 10.3% of respondents were treated as mad. 6.9% of them were either laughed at, treated as cursed or rejected. Table 10: What are the reactions and attitudes of people towards your sick loved one? Valid Isolation Stigmatisation Treated as mad Blank stare Laugh Unfriendly Mockery Rejection Treated as cursed Total Conclusion Frequency 12 - 29 Percent - 100.0 Valid Percent - 100.0 Cumulative Percent - 100.0 1. Most of the caregivers had no prior knowledge before taking care of their sick patients 2. The study shows that most of them could only use family members as support mechanisms 3. Isolation of dementia patients was the major reaction of people when they came in contact with them. 4. Almost all respondents needed financial aid to take care of the patients. Recommendations 1. Most caregivers caregivers should be trained 2. Government should provide centres to train the caregivers while there should be sensitization for everyone to avoid isolation and stigmatization. 3. Also, the government, individuals or NGOs can build homes for the old and try to make them affordable too. 4. Existing health insurance schemes should be planned to accommodate such patients especially for low income earners. APPENDIX Classification of Some Research Data 3 Quest. No. Question How was the first manifestation of this sickness? 4 How old was she/he? Classification 5 9 What was your first reaction? How are you handling the situation since you discovered it? 11 14 How are you handling such behaviours? Do you sometimes get angry towards the patient because of 16 their behaviour? What kind of support mechanisms do you have? 18 What kind of support will you want/ think will help you? 20 What are the reactions and attitudes of people towards your sick loved one? 21 Did your physical health deteriorate because of the caregiving?