Abstract
Purpose of the Study In India, the rate of population aging, the greater burden of chronic disease-related care, and smaller families question the sustainability of traditional family based, home long term support and services (LTSS). However, little is still known about Indians’ perception of formal LTSS.
Design and Methods A mixed-methods design of family caregivers for older adults from Jodhpur, Rajasthan (n=30 in-depth interviews; n=100 quantitative survey). Inductive qualitative data analysis identified emergent themes about perceptions of either informal or formal LTSS. Caregivers self-reported which common LTSS they needed in a quantitative survey. Multivariable Poisson and logistic regression models were used to estimate the average total number of LTSS and probabilities of self reporting wanting individual LTSS, respectively.
Results The central theme was a negative perception of formal LTSS, especially the idea of paid helpers. A second theme served as the rationale for the first theme: caregivers reported a “duty” to provide care to one’s family that “others” and those “doing it for money” could not meet. Caregivers reported on average 2.8 LTSS needs of 10 options. Formal LTSS, like home-health care assistance with instrumental activities of daily living, were least frequently reported; caregiver education and self-care activities were the most reported.
Implications Despite providing intensive amounts of informal LTSS and care for their family members, Indian caregivers consistently reported disinterest in using formal LTSS alternatives in qualitative and quantitative data. Caregivers reported a stronger desire for services that support their ability to carry out their caregiving roles.
Competing Interest Statement
The authors have declared no competing interest.
Funding Statement
This study was funded by the Global Spotlight International Research Seed Grant, University of Minnesota Twin Cities.
Author Declarations
I confirm all relevant ethical guidelines have been followed, and any necessary IRB and/or ethics committee approvals have been obtained.
Yes
The details of the IRB/oversight body that provided approval or exemption for the research described are given below:
The study was approved by the University of Minnesota in Minneapolis and Tata Institute of Social Sciences in Mumbai Institutional Review Boards, respectively.
I confirm that all necessary patient/participant consent has been obtained and the appropriate institutional forms have been archived, and that any patient/participant/sample identifiers included were not known to anyone (e.g., hospital staff, patients or participants themselves) outside the research group so cannot be used to identify individuals.
Yes
I understand that all clinical trials and any other prospective interventional studies must be registered with an ICMJE-approved registry, such as ClinicalTrials.gov. I confirm that any such study reported in the manuscript has been registered and the trial registration ID is provided (note: if posting a prospective study registered retrospectively, please provide a statement in the trial ID field explaining why the study was not registered in advance).
Yes
I have followed all appropriate research reporting guidelines, such as any relevant EQUATOR Network research reporting checklist(s) and other pertinent material, if applicable.
Yes
Data Availability
All data produced in the present study are available upon reasonable request to the authors
