PDF
ePub
Citation
Print
Abstract
Purpose
This study explored the care experience of persons assisting the disabled people with their activities.
Methods
Concurrent triangulation mixed methods design was used. The quantitative data on care experience were collected from 370 personal assistants for the disabled persons from May 10 to June 30, 2017, while qualitative data were collected through focus group interviews with 11 personal assistants in August 2017.
Results
The participants experienced unfair treatment including requests for doing work for the client's family or unrelated work (35.2%), violence or assault (23.6%), sexual harassment or interest (7.1%), and infection risk (7.1%). Many of them suffered from health problems such as work-related muscular pain, headache, or fatigue. There was low satisfaction with the psychosocial work environment and 16.2% participants experienced depression. The participants' care experience was classified into four categories of “ feeling like giving up because of emotional difficulty”, “ work overload and tough working condition”, “ expectation to improve work confidence through practical skill training”, and “ hope for systematic support”.
Conclusion
The results suggest that need-based emotional competence building programs are required to prevent their physical and emotional exhaustion among the personal assistants along with strengthening their job capacity. Furthermore, the decision makers need to pay attention to their work environment to ensure their emotional competence.
REFERENCES
1. Kim C, Lee JH. Reform of social service delivery systems; Research Report. Seoul: Public Policy Institute for People;2015. December. Report No.: 2015-04.
2. Kim JH, Lee SW, Kang DW, Lee HG, Ho SH, Kang JB, et al. The disabled white book 2017. [Internet]. Seoul: Korea Disabled People's Development Institute;2018. [cited 2019 July 27]. Available from:. https://www.koddi.or.kr/data/research01_view.jsp?brdNum=7404293&brdTp=&searchParamUrl=brdType%3DRSH%26amp%3BbrdRshYnData%3Ddata%26amp%3BselBrdProgSt%3D%26amp%3Bpage%3D2%26amp%3BsearchKeyword%3D%26amp%3BpageSize%3D20%26amp%3BsearchType%3D%26amp%3BbrdTp%3D.
3. Ministry of Health and Welfare. List of the activity support institutions [Internet]. Sejong: Ministry of Health and Welfare;2017. [cited 2017 May 30]. Available from:. http://www.mohw.go.kr/react/gm/sgm0601vw.jsp?PAR_MENU_ID=13&MENU_ID=1304021101&page=1&CONT_SEQ=342297.
4. Kim SH, Lee YH, Oh WC, Hwang JH, Oh MA, Lee MK, et al. Findings and implications of disability survey 2017. Policy Report. Sejong: Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs;2017. November. Report No.: 2017-90.
5. Kim S-Y. A study on the labor experiences of care service workers: focused on emotional labor and relation-based labor. The Women's Studies. 2012; 82(1):103–36. https://doi.org/10.33949/tws.2012..1.004.
6. Lee SR, Park JO, Park JC. Intel Research Center. A study on the emotional labor, risk factor, health impact of emotional labor-er. Research Report. Ulsan: Occupational Safety and Health Research Institute;2015. November. Report No. 2015-Research Institute-1148.
7. Maslach C, Leiter MP. Reversing burnout: how to rekindle your passion for your work. IEEE Engineering Management Review. 2010; 38(4):91–6.
8. Kim ST, Kim DK, Lee W. A study on emotional labor and coor-dinators‘s social support of personal assistants affecting turnover intention and mediation effect of job stress. Journal of Vocational Rehabilitation. 2016; 26(2):15–32. https://doi.org/10.24226/jvr.2016.08.26.2.15.
9. Lee IS, Kim SY, Lee BH. A study on the factors influencing on the intent to leave among personal assistants. Disability & Employment. 2010; 20(1):289–312. https://doi.org/10.15707/disem.2010.20.1.013.
10. Stone RI, Wiener JM. Who will care for us? Addressing the longterm care workforce crisis. [Internet]. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute;2001. [cited 2019 July 27] Available from:. https://www.urban.org/research/publication/who-will-care-us-addressing-longterm-care-workforce-crisis.
11. Jung YJ, Kim EH. A qualitative approach on the experiences of personal assistant for the disabled person's experience. Crisi-sonomy. 2015; 11(7):157–80.
12. Lee W, Kim D-K. A study on emotional labor affecting a burnout level of personal assistants-focused on the mediating effects of job stress and job satisfaction. Social Science Research Review. 2011; 27(2):115–40.
13. Scharlach AE, Gustavson K, Dal Santo TS. Assistance received by employed caregivers and their care recipients: who helps care recipients when caregivers work full time? The Gerontologist. 2007; 47(6):752–62. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/47.6.752.
14. Kim DK. Current state and challenges of PAS providers. Health and Welfare Policy Forum. 2014; 217:38–47.
15. Beon YC, Choi BC, Hwang JH, Kang MH, Lee SH, Lee MK, et al. Provision strategy of regular activity support through survey on the status of activity assistance for severely disabled people. Policy Report. Sejong: Korea Institute for Health and Social Affairs;2015. December. Report No.: 2015-80.
16. Kang MH. A phenomenological study on the experiences of personal assistant services-focusing on the construction of care ethic and professionality. Journal of Disability and Welfare. 2014; 25:83–111.
17. Lim SY, Lee JS. A study on women's care-work in the personal assistant service by activity assistant for people with disabil-ities. The Journal of Humanities and Social Science. 2016; 7(2):533–59. https://doi.org/10.22143/HSS21.7.2.25.
18. Tashakkori A, Teddlie C. SAGE handbook of mixed methods in social & behavioral research. 2nd ed.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications;2010. p. 360–94.
19. Morgan DL. Focus group as qualitative research. 2nd ed.Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications;1997. p. 6–17.
20. Occupational safety and health research institute. Work environment survey [Internet]. Ulsan; Occupational safety and health research institute;2018. [cited 2019 June 28] Available from:. http://www.kosha.or.kr/kosha/data/primitiveData.do?mode=view&articleNo=328603&article.offset=0&articleLimit=1.
21. Miller WC, Anton HA, Townson AF. Measurement properties of the CESD scale among individuals with spinal cord injury. Spinal Cord. 2008; 46:287–92.
22. Kristensen TS, Borritz M, Villadsen E, Christensen KB. The Copenhagen Burnout Inventory: a new tool for the assessment of burnout. Work & Stress. 2005; 19(3):192–207. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678370500297720.
23. Elo S, Kyngäs H. The qualitative content analysis process. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 2008; 62(1):107–15. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.2007.04569.x.
24. Guba EG, Lincoln YS. Fourth generation evaluation. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications;1989. p. 1–294.
25. Ministry of Health and Welfare. 2019 Guidelines for disability activity assistance services [Internet]. Sejong: Ministry of Health and Welfare;2019. [cited 2017 June 30]. Available from:. http://www.mohw.go.kr/react/jb/sjb030301vw.jsp?PAR_MENU_ID=03&MENU_ID=032901&CONT_SEQ=350702.
26. Centre for Independent Living in Toronto (CILT) Inc. Direct funding: general information [Internet]. Toronto: Centre for Independent Living in Toronto;2019. [cited 2019 August 24]. Available from:. https://www.dfontario.ca/info/general-faqs.html.
27. Carers Australia. National programs [Internet]. Napier Close: Carers Australia;2019. [cited 2019 August 24]. Available from:. https://www.carersaustralia.com.au/how-we-work/national-programs/.
28. Seoul Supporting Center for Elderly Careworkers. Introduction. Seoul: Seoul Supporting Center for Elderly Careworkers;2019. [cited 2019 August 25]. Available from:. http://www.dolbom.org/sub/sub01_02_01.php.
29. Kim JH. Recognition struggle and social recognition of care worker: focusing on Axel Honneth's accreditation theory. Journal of Social Science. 2017; 43(3):323–51. https://doi.org/10.15820/khjss.2017.43.3.013.
30. Janus AL, Doty P. Trends in informal care for disabled older Americans, 1982-2012. The Gerontologist. 2018; 58(5):863–71. https://doi.org/10.1093/geront/gnx076.
31. Arai Y, Sugiura M, Washio M, Miura H, Kudo K. Caregiver depression predicts early discontinuation of care for disabled elderly at home. Psychiatry and Clinical Neurosciences. 2001; 55(4):379–82. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1440-1819.2001.00878.x.
32. Ang S, Malhotra R. Expressive social support buffers the impact of care-related work interruptions on caregivers' depres-sive symptoms. Aging & Mental Health. 2018; 22(6):755–63. https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2017.1317329.
33. Cho K, Kim Y-J. A study on family caregiver support programs in the U.S.A: the case of the state of Georgia. International Journal of Human Ecology. 2016; 17(2):1–15. https://doi.org/10.6115/ijhe.2016.17.2.1.
34. Han EJ, Lee JS, Park SY, Park SH. Implementation and evaluation of demonstration project of family counseling support service in longterm care II. Wonju: National Health Insurance Service;2016. p. 1–270.
35. Redfoot D, Feinberg L, Houser A. The aging of the baby boom and the growing care gap: a look at future declines in the availability of family caregivers (insight on the issues 85). [Internet]. Washington: AARP Public Policy Institute;2013. [cited 2019 June 28] Available from:. https://www.aarp.org/content/dam/aarp/research/public_policy_institute/ltc/2013/baby-boom-and-the-growing-care-gap-insight-AARP-ppi-ltc.pdf.
Table 1.
Distribution of Demographic and Work-related Characteristics or Experiences, and Physio-mental Health of the Participants (N=370)
| Variables | Categories | n (%) or M± SD |
|---|---|---|
| Gender | Men | 61 (16.5) |
| Women | 309 (83.5) | |
| Age (year) | 52.60±11.50 | |
| Marrital status (n=365) | Unmarried | 34 (9.3) |
| Married | 282 (77.3) | |
| Bereaved/divorced | 49 (13.4) | |
| Education (n=365) | ≤ Elementary school | 14 (3.8) |
| Middle school | 36 (9.9) | |
| High school | 188 (51.5) | |
| ≥ College | 127 (34.8) | |
| Subjective economic status (n=363) | High | 11 (3.0) |
| Middle | 290 (79.9) | |
| Low | 62 (17.1) | |
| No. of clients/month | 1.33±0.53 | |
| Working hours per month | 142.53±75.46 | |
| Work on holiday or night overtime per month (day) | 4.55±6.12 | |
| Career in this field (month) | 42.22±32.14 | |
| Self-rated care skill (n=360) | Good | 113 (31.4) |
| Moderate | 178 (49.4) | |
| Poor | 69 (19.2) | |
| Unfair treatment from users/users' families at work during the last year† | Request for doing work for client's family/unrelated work | 128 (35.2) |
| Risk of infection from clients and their families | 22 (6.1) | |
| Risk of violence/assault by client's development disorder | 39 (10.7) | |
| Verbal abuse | 26 (7.1) | |
| Physical violence and assault | 21 (5.8) | |
| Unwanted sexual interest/sexual harassment | 26 (7.1) | |
| Work related cost and safety issues | Clients paid the additional cost of monthly limit | 266 (71.9) |
| Additional expenses were paid by clients | 237 (64.1) | |
| The replacement labor supply was available | 296 (80.0) | |
| Safety and health education were provided | 280 (75.7) | |
| Regular health checkup was provided | 153 (41.4) | |
| Appropriate protective equipment was provided | 330 (89.2) | |
| Information of client's disability and illness was provided | 144 (38.9) | |
| Psycosocial work environment (0~3) | 1.80±0.49 | |
| Work related health problem or symptom | Upper extremity muscle pain | 222 (60.0) |
| Headache/eye strain | 193 (52.2) | |
| Whole-body fatigue | 167 (45.1) | |
| Lower extremity muscle pain | 152 (41.1) | |
| Backache | 137 (37.0) | |
| Sleep disorder | 71 (19.2) | |
| Depression/anxiety | 59 (15.9) | |
| Skin problem | 38 (10.3) | |
| Others | 116 (31.0) | |
| Stress level (0~3) | 1.82±0.58 | |
| Depression (CESD-10) (0~30) | CESD-10 scores ≥10 | 5.16±4.30 |
| 60 (16.2) | ||
| Burnout (0~100) | Personal (6 items) | 32.63±18.47 |
| Work-related (7 items) | 27.06±17.86 | |
| Client-related (6 items) | 24.95±19.35 |
Table 2.
Demographic Data of the Participants of Focus Group Interviews
Table 3.
Caring Experiences of Personal Assistants for the Disabled
XML Download