Ethnoracial differences for caregiving burden in Parkinson's disease.

INTRODUCTION: Caregivers play an important role in Parkinson's disease (PD) treatment, especially as the disease progresses. As the symptom profile and needs of people with PD (PwP) differ across ethnoracial groups, whether caregiving needs also differ for different ethnoracial groups should be investigated. METHODS: Data were obtained from the Parkinson's Foundation funded Parkinson's Outcomes Project for PwP identifying as Hispanic (n = 495), non-Hispanic Asian (n = 170), non-Hispanic Black (n = 162), or non-Hispanic White (n = 7687). Cross-sectional and longitudinal total Multidimensional Caregiver Strain Index (MCSI) and domain-specific scores for caregiving burden were compared across the ethnoracial groups. Effect of demographics and clinical variables, interaction of these variables with ethnoracial groups for caregiver burden was assessed. RESULTS: Care partners of PwP identifying as non-Hispanic Asian experienced the most burden. PwP identifying as non-Hispanic White were oldest, yet their care partners experienced the least burden. Care partners of PwP identifying as non-Hispanic Asian experienced more burden in physical and social domains, care partners of PwP identifying as Hispanic experienced more burden in financial and elder demanding/manipulative domains. Over time, burden increased similarly across the ethnoracial groups. Effect of frequency of falls, hospital admission, neuropsychiatric disorder and social support on burden over time differed across the groups. CONCLUSION: PwP from different ethnoracial groups can experience different levels of caregiving burden. Predictors for caregiving burden, such as social support and falls can have different impacts based on ethnicity and race. Caregiver needs should also be assessed and culturally competent support should be provided to benefit all affected by PD.

Role of affective reactivity induced by cigarette packaging including graphic warning labels: the CASA Study.

OBJECTIVE: To identify whether three types of cigarette pack designs, including three versions of graphic warning label (GWL) plain packs, one GWL absent and branding absent pack (blank) and the smoker's own GWL absent and branding present pack (US), elicit different valence, type and levels of affect. DESIGN: US daily smokers (n=324) were asked to handle each of the five pack types and 'think aloud' their reactions. To avoid a muted familiarity response, exposure to their own US pack followed exposure to at least one GWL plain pack. Reactions were scored on a reactivity scale (-3 to +3) and the text was coded for speech polarity (-1 to +1) and emotive word frequency. RESULTS: Reactivity scores had excellent inter-rater reliability (agreement ≥86%; intraclass correlation coefficient ≥0.89) and were correlated with speech polarity (r=0.21-0.37, p<0.001). When considering their US pack, approximately two-thirds of smokers had a low (31.5%) to medium (34.6%) positive response (reactivity=1.29; polarity=0.14) with expressed feelings of joy and trust. Blank packaging prompted a largely (65.4%) neutral response (reactivity=0.03; polarity=0.00). The gangrenous foot GWL provoked mostly medium (46.9%) to high (48.1%) negative responses (reactivity=-2.44; polarity=-0.20), followed by neonatal baby (reactivity=-1.85; polarity=-0.10) and throat cancer (reactivity=-1.76; polarity=-0.08) warnings. GWLs varied in their elicitation of disgust, anger, fear and sadness. CONCLUSION: Initial reactions to GWL packs, a blank pack, and smokers' current US pack reflected negative, neutral, and positive affect, respectively. Different versions of the GWL pack elicited different levels and types of immediate negative affect.