[Experiences of Burden and Coping Strategies and their Associations with Mental Health and Well-Being in COPD - a Mixed Methods Study].

Pub Date : 2024-05-01 Epub Date: 2024-03-16 DOI:10.1055/a-2255-8695
Paul Köbler, Ralf T Vogel, Peter Joraschky, Wolfgang Söllner
{"title":"[Experiences of Burden and Coping Strategies and their Associations with Mental Health and Well-Being in COPD - a Mixed Methods Study].","authors":"Paul Köbler, Ralf T Vogel, Peter Joraschky, Wolfgang Söllner","doi":"10.1055/a-2255-8695","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Understanding trigger and maintaining factors regarding psychiatric comorbidities in COPD is of great importance. In the presented mixed-methods study, qualitative interview data on burden experience and coping were related to psychiatric comorbidity (using PHQ-D) and quality of live (Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedulde, PANAS and Satisfaction with Life Scale, SWLS) and extended by the Freiburg Questionnaire on Coping with Illness (FKV-LIS). The two interview questions prompting narrative were 1.) \"What is currently bothering you most?\"; 2.) \"How do you cope with your chronic disease in everyday life?\" A total of 62 patients who were hospitalized due to COPD participated. The severity of physical impairment was assessed using GOLD stage and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). The interviews conducted were content analyzed and then quantified. The collected data were then compared between two groups with regard to mental distress. 13 themes of burden and 11 coping strategies were identified by content analysis. A total of 42 patients showed signs of mental distress, while 20 patients did not show signs of distress. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of sociodemographic characteristics and the severity of their physical symptoms. In the first interview question, the stressed group more frequently addressed issues related to death (35.7% versus 15.0%) and social stress (21.4% versus 0.0%). With respect to the second interview question, the nonstressed group was significantly more likely to mention strategies for consciously emphasizing positive emotions (70.0% versus 31.0%). In addition, higher scores on the FKV scales for depressive coping and trivialization and wishful thinking were evident in the stressed group. Quality of life and mental distress should be considered in clinical care for COPD. Interventions to influence illness perception and related coping styles are important, especially with regard to the development of a realistic and optimistic perspective on life and disease burden, as well as the inclusion of group and family therapeutic interventions.</p>","PeriodicalId":0,"journal":{"name":"","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1055/a-2255-8695","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/3/16 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Understanding trigger and maintaining factors regarding psychiatric comorbidities in COPD is of great importance. In the presented mixed-methods study, qualitative interview data on burden experience and coping were related to psychiatric comorbidity (using PHQ-D) and quality of live (Positive Affect Negative Affect Schedulde, PANAS and Satisfaction with Life Scale, SWLS) and extended by the Freiburg Questionnaire on Coping with Illness (FKV-LIS). The two interview questions prompting narrative were 1.) "What is currently bothering you most?"; 2.) "How do you cope with your chronic disease in everyday life?" A total of 62 patients who were hospitalized due to COPD participated. The severity of physical impairment was assessed using GOLD stage and the Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). The interviews conducted were content analyzed and then quantified. The collected data were then compared between two groups with regard to mental distress. 13 themes of burden and 11 coping strategies were identified by content analysis. A total of 42 patients showed signs of mental distress, while 20 patients did not show signs of distress. There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of sociodemographic characteristics and the severity of their physical symptoms. In the first interview question, the stressed group more frequently addressed issues related to death (35.7% versus 15.0%) and social stress (21.4% versus 0.0%). With respect to the second interview question, the nonstressed group was significantly more likely to mention strategies for consciously emphasizing positive emotions (70.0% versus 31.0%). In addition, higher scores on the FKV scales for depressive coping and trivialization and wishful thinking were evident in the stressed group. Quality of life and mental distress should be considered in clinical care for COPD. Interventions to influence illness perception and related coping styles are important, especially with regard to the development of a realistic and optimistic perspective on life and disease burden, as well as the inclusion of group and family therapeutic interventions.

分享
查看原文
[慢性阻塞性肺病患者的负担体验和应对策略及其与心理健康和幸福感的关系--一项混合方法研究]。
了解慢性阻塞性肺病患者精神疾病的诱发和维持因素非常重要。在本项混合方法研究中,有关负担体验和应对的定性访谈数据与精神疾病合并症(使用 PHQ-D)和生活质量(积极情绪-消极情绪量表 PANAS 和生活满意度量表 SWLS)相关,并通过弗莱堡疾病应对问卷(FKV-LIS)进行扩展。提示叙述的两个访谈问题是 1.)"2)"您在日常生活中如何应对慢性疾病?共有 62 名因慢性阻塞性肺病住院的患者参加了此次访谈。采用 GOLD 分期和夏尔森合并症指数(CCI)评估了患者身体受损的严重程度。对所进行的访谈进行了内容分析和量化。然后将收集到的数据与两组患者的精神压力进行比较。通过内容分析,确定了 13 个负担主题和 11 个应对策略。共有 42 名患者表现出精神痛苦,20 名患者没有表现出精神痛苦。两组患者在社会人口学特征和身体症状严重程度方面没有明显差异。在第一个访谈问题中,精神压力过大组更常提及与死亡(35.7% 对 15.0%)和社会压力(21.4% 对 0.0%)有关的问题。关于第二个访谈问题,非压力组明显更有可能提到有意识地强调积极情绪的策略(70.0% 对 31.0%)。此外,压力组在抑郁应对、琐碎化和一厢情愿方面的 FKV 量表得分明显更高。慢性阻塞性肺病的临床治疗应考虑生活质量和精神痛苦。影响疾病认知和相关应对方式的干预措施非常重要,特别是要培养对生活和疾病负担的现实和乐观的观点,以及纳入团体和家庭治疗干预措施。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信