军医院校大学生社会支持、应付方式与心理健康的相关性(英文)

Correlation of social support and coping style with mental health among undergraduates from military medical universities

背景:军校大学生面临着多种心理应激,若采取不良的应付方式,可能影响心理健康状况,心理健康可能还与社会支持和人格有关。目的:探讨军医院校大学生社会支持、应付方式及人格与心理健康状况的关系。设计:整群抽样,问卷调查。单位:解放军第四军医大学基础部教学实验中心和预防医学系及西安运动创伤医院。对象:于2004/10整群抽取某校一年级军医大学生352人作为观察对象。方法:采用症状自评量表、社会支持评定量表、应付方式问卷和艾森克个性问卷对受试者进行团体问卷调查。症状自评量表包括90个项目,共10个因子。社会支持量表包括主观支持、客观支持、支持利用度3个因子以及社会支持总分项目。应付方式问卷包括解决问题、自责、求助、退避、幻想、合理化6个因子。艾森克人格问卷简式量表中国版主要包括内外向、情绪稳定性、精神质、掩饰性4个维度。所得资料用t检验和相关分析进行统计学处理。主要观察指标:①不同心理健康水平军医大学生的社会支持、应对方式及人格的各因子得分比较。②不同社会支持、应付方式和人格与症状自评量表因子的相关性。③不同社会支持情况下军医大学生的心理健康、应对方式及人格的各因子得分比较。结果:发放问卷352份,全部收回并合格,有效率100%。①以症状自评量表总分为分组指标,将被试中得分最高和最低的25%抽出,分别作为高症状组和低症状组,两组相比,低症状组学生社会支持总分、主观支持和对支持利用度分值都高于高症状组学生,客观支持无差异;高症状组学生选择自责、幻想和退避等不成熟应付方式分值高于低症状组,求助的选择分值低于低症状组;高症状组内外向评分低于低症状组,而情绪稳定性分则高于低症状组。②心理健康各因子与支持总分、支持利用度、求助、内外向和掩饰性具有负相关(r=-0.131～-0.306,P<0.05或P<0.01);与自责、幻想、退避、合理化、情绪稳定性具有正相关(r=0.141～0.450,P<0.05或P<0.01)。③以支持总分为分组指标,将被试中得分最高和最低的27%分别作为高支持组和低支持组,两组比较,高支持组心理健康水平优于低支持组;高支持组学生多选择积极的应付方式,低支持组更倾向于选择消极的应付方式;高支持组内外向评分高于低支持组,而情绪稳定性精神质分显著低于低支持组穴P<0.05雪。结论:社会支持、应付方式和艾森克人格问卷之间相互作用、相互制约,共同影响心理健康状况。

BACKGROUND： Undergraduates from military medical universities face many psychological stresses. Poor coping style might affect the status of mental health. Mental health might also be associated with social support and personality. OBJECTIVE： To investigate the correlation of social support and coping style with mental health among undergraduates from military medical universities. DESIGN： Cluster sampling and questionnaire investigation. SETTING： The Center of Basic Medicine Eexperiment, School of Basic Medicine and School of Preventive Medicine of Fourth Military Medical University of Chinese PLA, and Xi＇an Hospital of Sports Trauma. PARTICIPANTS： Totally 352 freshmen of a military medical university were chosen by cluster sampling in October 2004 as the subjects. METHODS： Investigation was performed on subjects with Symptom checklist-90 （SCL-90）, social support rating scale （SSRS）, coping style questionnaire （CSQ） and revised Eysenck＇s personality questionnaires short scale for Chinese （EPQ-RSC）. SCL-90 consists of 90 items, including 10 factors. SSRS consists of subjective support, objective support and the utilization of support 3 factors as well as total score of social support. CSQ consists of problem solving, self-reproach, asking for help, keeping out of the way, fancy, rationalization 6 factors. EPQ-RSC mainly consisted of extraversion-introversion （E）, neuroticism （N）, psychoticism/tough mindedness （P） and lie/social diserability （L） 4 dimensions. Data were performed statistical management with t test and correlation analysis. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES： ① Comparison of the scores of various factors of social support, coping style and personality among undergraduates with different mental health levels from military medical universities. ② Correlation of different social supports, copying styles and personalities with SCL-90. ③ Comparison of scores of mental health, coping style and personality of military medical undergraduates under different social supports. RESULTS： Totally 352 questionnaires were handed out and all of them were retrieved and eligible, with responding rate of 100%. ① The total scores of SRSS were taken as the grouping index, and 25% of the undergraduates who had the highest scores and the lowest scores were respectively chosen as severe symptom group and mild symptom group. Total scores of social support, subjective support and the utilization of support were higher in the mild symptom group than in the severe symptom group, but no difference in the objective support existed between two groups; Compared with mild symptom group, self-reproach, fancy, keeping out of the way and other immature coping styles were more significantly used, but asking for help was less, the scores of E were lower, but those of N were higher in the severe symptom group. ② Various factors of mental health were significantly negatively correlated with the total scores of support, the utilization of support, asking for help, E and L （r=-0.131 to -0.306, P 〈 0.05 or P 〈 0.01）, but positively correlated with self-reproach, fancy, keeping out of the way, rationalization and N （r=0.141-0.450, P 〈 0.05 or P 〈 0.01）. ③ Total scores of support was used as the grouping index, 27% of the subjects who had the highest scores and lowest scores were chosen respectively as high support group and low support group. Mental health level was superior in the high support group to in the low support group; Most of the undergraduates of high support group preferred active coping styles, and those of low support group preferred passive coping styles; Scores of E of high support group were higher than those of low support group, and the scores of N and P were lower than those of low support group （P 〈 0.05）. CONCLUSION： Social support, coping style and EPQ-RSC interact and eo-influenee mental health.