期刊文献+

尿路造口患者自护能力现状及其影响因素分析 被引量:2

Self-Care Ability of Patients with Urostomy and its Influencing Factors
下载PDF
导出
摘要 目的调查尿路造口患者出院后自护能力的现状并分析其影响因素,旨在为该类患者自护能力的干预性研究提供依据。方法于2019年6—9月选取门诊就诊的尿路造口患者为调查对象,采用一般资料调查表、造口自我护理量表-早期版(SSCS-ESV)、中文版造口接受度问卷、自尊量表、社会影响量表(SIS)进行调查。结果共收回有效问卷191份,有效回收率为90.95%(191/210)。自护情况:59例(30.89%)完全自己护理造口(完全自护组),29例(15.18%)需要他人协助护理造口(协助自护组),103例(53.93%)不是自己护理造口(非自护组)。完全自护、协助自护组造口自护得分分别为(34.71±2.12)分、(26.62±3.82)分,处于中等水平。有序Logistic回归分析显示,造口存在时间、术后开始自护时间、造口接受度、病耻感是影响患者自护情况的主要因素;多元逐步回归分析显示,造口存在时间、造口接受度、自尊水平、病耻感是影响患者出院后自护水平的主要因素。结论尿路造口患者的造口自护能力处于中等水平,以自护情况、自护水平及其影响因素作为干预的切入点,可提高患者造口的自护能力和生活质量。 Objective To investigate the current situation of self-care ability and its influencing factors in urostomy patients after discharge,and to provide a basis for the intervention research on self-care ability of urostomy patients.Methods Urostomy patients admitted to the outpatient department from June to September 2019 were surveyed using the general information questionnaire,early stage version of stoma self-care scale(SSCS-ESV),Chinese version of colostomy acceptance questionnaire,self-esteem scale,and social impact scale(SIS).Results A total of 191 valid questionnaires were collected,and the effective recovery rate was 90.95%(191/210).Among the 191 urostomy patients,59(30.89%)completed self-nursing(complete self-care group),29(15.18%)needed assistance(assisted self-care group),and 103(53.93%)did not performed self-nursing(non-self-care group).The score of self-care was 34.71±2.12 in complete self-care group,and 26.62±3.82 in assisted self-care group,which were in the middle level.The orderly logistic regression analysis showed that the main factors affecting complete self-care included stoma existence time,self-care start time,stoma acceptance and stigmatisation.Multiple stepwise regression analysis showed that stoma existence time,stoma acceptance,self-esteem and stigmatization were the main factors influencing the self-care ability of urostomy patients.Conclusion The self-care ability of urostomy patients is in the middle level.Interventions based on self-care situation,self-care level and their influencing factors can improve the self-care ability and quality of life of urostomy patients.
作者 洪慧 熊柱凤 汤利萍 王水连 HONG Hui;XIONG Zhu-feng;TANG Li-ping;WANG Shui-lian(2018 Grade of Nursing College of Graduated School,Nanchang University,Nanchang 330006,China;Department of Urology of the First Affiliated Hospital,Nanchang University,Nanchang 330006,China;Wound Stoma Clinic of the First Affiliated Hospital,Nanchang University,Nanchang 330006,China)
出处 《实用临床医学(江西)》 CAS 2021年第1期65-71,85,共8页 Practical Clinical Medicine
基金 江西省科技厅应用研究培优类(20181BBG78029) 江西省科技厅重点研发计划一般项目(20203BBGL73153) 江西省卫生计生委科技计划(202130236)。
关键词 膀胱癌 尿路造口 自护能力 影响因素 生活质量 bladder cancer urostomy self-care ability influencing factors quality of life
  • 相关文献

参考文献6

二级参考文献99

  • 1宋艳丽,王继忠,刘君位.肠造口用品:发展·现状·展望[J].中华护理杂志,2005,40(6):433-434. 被引量:18
  • 2Nunnally JC. Psychometric Theory [M], 3nd Edition. New York: Mc- Graw-Hill, 1994.
  • 3James RM. The relationship between number of response categories and reliability oflikert-type questionnaires [J]. J Edu Meas, 1974, 11: 49- 53.
  • 4EU P. COX IIl. The optimal number of response alternatives for a scale: a review[J]. J Mark Res, 1980, 17: 407-422.
  • 5Duane F, Alwin. Information transmission in the survey interview: number of response categories and the reliability of attitude measurement[J]. Soeio Meth, 1992, 22:83-118.
  • 6Debroah LB,Craig KE. The effects of nonnormality and number of response categories on reliability[J]. Appl Meas Educ, 1996, 9: 151-160.
  • 7Carolyn CP, Andrew MC. Optimal number of response categories in rating scales: reliability, validity, discriminating power, and respondent Preferences[J]. Acta Psychol, 2000, 104: 1-15.
  • 8Li-Jen Weng. Impact of the number of response categories and anchorlabels on coefficient alpha and test-retest reliability [J]. Educ Psychol Meas, 2004, 64: 956-972.
  • 9Luis ML, Eduardo Garcta-Cueto. Effect of the number of response categories on the reliability and validity of rating scales [J].Methodology, 2008, 4: 73-79.
  • 10Alberto Maydeu-Olivares, Uwe K, Donna C. The effect of varying the number of response alternatives in rating scales: experimental evidence from intra-individual effects[ J ]. Behav Res Meth, 2009, 41: 295-308.

共引文献224

同被引文献47

引证文献2

二级引证文献12

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