br Previous research on informal care

Previous research on informal care provision and health Previous studies exploring the link between provision of informal care and health reflect the complexity of researching this topic area. Cross-sectional analyses may be limited in examining the factors preceding or following an individual\'s provision of informal care provision; however they A-1210477 Supplier can highlight the importance of distinguishing between particular types of care, or the importance of exploring the intensity of care provision (Evandrou, 1996). For example, analysis of 2001 UK Census data showed that non-carers were slightly more likely than carers to report good health (Doran et al., 2003). However, O’Reilly, Connolly, Rosato, and Patterson (2008), using data from the 2001 Northern Ireland Census, found that although carers were less likely than non-carers to report a limiting long-term illness (LLTI), health outcomes were worse among men providing 50h of care per week or more. Similarly, Young, Grundy, and Kalogirou (2005), using 2001 census data for England & Wales and focussing on couples aged 65 and over in 2001 where at least one of the two spouses reported a LLTI, found that those who provided 20h of care per week or more reported poorer health than those who provided fewer hours of care per week. More recent results analysing data from the 2011 UK Census indicate that informal carers are generally more likely to report ‘not good’ general health but that such likelihood increases in line with the hours of unpaid care provision, although this work does not control for the demographic characteristics of carers (Office for National Statistics, 2013a, 2013b). Longitudinal analyses can identify the effect of informal care provision on the carer\'s health, as well as their mortality risk (Vlachantoni, Evandrou, Falkingham & Robards, 2013). Studying informal carers at more than one point in time, identifying ‘care trajectories’, and their impact on individuals’ wellbeing is increasingly important in the context of both population ageing and increasing diversity in household structures (Robards, Evandrou, Falkingham and Vlachantoni, 2012), the combination of which can require individuals to manage or combine multiple economic and caring roles (Evandrou & Glaser, 2004). For instance, Rahrig Jenkins, Kabeto, and Langa (2009) explored the impact of informal care provision by spouses in 2000 on the carers’ health status two years later, and did not find a negative effect. In contrast, Lawton et al. (2000) studied over 600 women aged 65 and over for 4 years, and found that women who had cared for at least 12 months were more likely to report poor physical and mental health compared to those who had not provided any care or care of a shorter duration during that time. In relation to the health and mortality of carers, O’Reilly et al. (2008) used data from the 2001 Northern Ireland Census on the health status of informal carers in order to explore their mortality risk 4 years later, and found that, controlling for a range of demographic and socio-economic characteristics, caregivers had a lower risk than non-caregivers, however such risk increased among caregivers as the number of hours of care provided increased. A similar study for England and Wales, using a comparable dataset, found that carers were more likely to report poorer health at baseline, yet survival analyses showed that they were at a significantly lower risk of dying (Ramsay, Grundy, & O\'Reilly, 2013). Indeed, similar research in the US found lower mortality among caregivers leading to the suggestion that it may be premature to conclude that health risks for caregivers are due to providing active help (Brown et al., 2009) and caregivers may benefit from providing care. Indeed some empirical work has drawn attention to the potential health benefits arising from informal carer roles, which may include improved self-worth, ‘proximity’ to a spouse and health benefits from ‘helping behaviour’ (Poulin, Brown, Dillard, & Smith, 2013; Kramer, 1997).