期刊文献+

山西省城乡老年人对日常生活能力及条件的自我评价 被引量:1

Self-appraisal of Daily Life Ability and Condition from Urban and Rural Senior Citizens of Shanxi Province
原文传递
导出
摘要 目的掌握山西省城乡老年人生命活动能力的情况,发现城乡老年人之间存在的差异,为提高老年人的生命质量提供依据。方法选用世界卫生组织编制的《世界卫生组织老年人生存质量测定简表(WHOQL-BREF)》调查问卷对山西省2640位老年人进行了问卷调查,建立SPSS11.5数据库,就城乡对比进行分析。结果城市老年人对自身日常生活条件和能力的评价,均优于农村老年人;城市老年人的精力更加充沛,农村老年人很少有机会进行休闲活动;但城乡老年人对身体活动能力的自我评价没有差别。结论城乡老年人生命活动能力的总体水平较高,能较好的应对日常生活中的事情,但城乡之间仍有差异,城市老年人的状况优于农村老年人。 Objective To know the situation of urban and rural senior citizens' vital activity abilities in Shanxi Province, discover the difference between them, and to provide the basis for improving senior citizens' life quality. Methods The World Health Organization Quality of Life Summary (WHOQL - BREF) questionnaire established by the World Health Organization was selected to carry on a survey among 2,640 senior citizens of Shanxi Province. The SPSS 11.5 database was established to conduct an analysis on the contrast between city and countryside. Results The self- appraisal of the urban senior citizens to own daily life condition and ability surpassed that of the rural elderly. The urban senior citizens were more vigorous; the rural senior citizens had very little opportunity to carry out the leisure activity. But there was no difference in self - appraisal of body activity ability between urban and rural senior citizens. Conclusions The total level of vital activity ability is high in urban and rural senior citizens, and they can deal with daily events very well. But there are still some differences between the city and countryside, the condition of urban senior citizens is superior to that of rural ones.
出处 《实用预防医学》 CAS 2009年第2期365-366,共2页 Practical Preventive Medicine
关键词 城乡老年人 生命活动能力 调查 Urban and rural senior citizen Vital activity ability Investigation
  • 相关文献

参考文献4

二级参考文献27

  • 1万崇华,方积乾.生存质量资料的统计分析方法[J].中华预防医学杂志,1996,30(3):172-174. 被引量:41
  • 2田雪原.中国1987年60岁以上老年人口抽样调查报告[J].中国人口学,1998,1.
  • 3Levi L. Psychosocial environmental factors and Psychosocially mediated effects of physical environmental factors [J]. Sc and J Work Environ Health, 1997, 23(suppl 3): 47~52
  • 4WHO. Report of the WHO Meeting on the Assessment of Quality of life in the Health Care [M]. WHO, 1991
  • 5Hays RD, Anderson R, Revicki D. Psychomtric considerations in evaluating health-related quality of life measures [J]. Quality of Life, 1993, 2:441~449
  • 6Hollen PJ, Gralla RJ. Comparison of instruments for measuring quality of life in patients with lung cancer [J]. Semin Oncol, 1996, 23 (2 suppl 5): 31~40
  • 7Stewart AL, Ware JE. Measuring functional and wellbeing: the medical outcomes study approach [C].Durham, N. C.: duke University Press, 1992
  • 8Magaziner J, Simonsick EK, Kashner TM, et al. Patients-proxy response comparability on measure of patient health and functional status [C]. J Clin Epidemiol, 1988, 41:1065~1074
  • 9Rothman ML, Hedrick SC, Bulcroft KA, et al. The vality of proxy-generated scores as measures of patients health status [J]. Med Care, 1989, 29:115~124
  • 10Epstein AM, Hall JA, Tognetti J, et al. Using proxies to evaluate quality of life: can they provide valid information about patient's health status and satisfaction with medical care? [J] Med Care, 1989, 27.. 91~98

共引文献81

同被引文献13

引证文献1

二级引证文献13

相关作者

内容加载中请稍等...

相关机构

内容加载中请稍等...

相关主题

内容加载中请稍等...

浏览历史

内容加载中请稍等...
;
使用帮助 返回顶部