是自我护理改善了应对,还是应对改善了自我护理?结构方程模型研究

IF 2.7 4区 医学 Q1 NURSING
Barbara Riegel PhD, RN, FAHA, FAAN , Claudio Barbaranelli PhD , Michael A. Stawnychy PhD, RN , Austin Matus PhD, RN , Karen B. Hirschman PhD, MSW, FGSA
{"title":"是自我护理改善了应对,还是应对改善了自我护理?结构方程模型研究","authors":"Barbara Riegel PhD, RN, FAHA, FAAN ,&nbsp;Claudio Barbaranelli PhD ,&nbsp;Michael A. Stawnychy PhD, RN ,&nbsp;Austin Matus PhD, RN ,&nbsp;Karen B. Hirschman PhD, MSW, FGSA","doi":"10.1016/j.apnr.2024.151810","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Support interventions often address both self-care and coping. Different approaches are used to promote self-care and coping so clarifying the intervention effect can guide clinicians and researchers to provide interventions that achieve benefit.</p></div><div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To compare two models to determine whether self-care improves coping or coping improves self-care.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We used cross-sectional data from 248 caregivers obtained at enrollment into a randomized controlled trial testing the efficacy of a support intervention. Factor scores for scales measuring caregiver demand, self-care, coping, stress appraisal, and mental health were derived from exploratory factor analysis. Structural equation models were analyzed using the factor scores as estimates of each construct. To control possible spurious effects caregiver age, gender, relationship with the patient, and income adequacy were included.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Both models were compatible with the data, but the self-care model was stronger than the coping model. That model had a non-significant chi square and an excellent fit to the data, χ<sup>2</sup>(4, <em>N</em> = 248) = 2.64, <em>p</em> = .62. The percentage of variance explained by the self-care model was 54 % for mental health, 42 % for stress appraisal, 10 % for avoidance coping, and 6 % for active coping. In the coping model the explained variance of stress appraisal dropped to 33 %, avoidance coping dropped to 0 %, and active coping dropped to 3 %.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The self-care model was strongest, illustrating that self-care decreases stress, promotes coping, and improves mental health. These results suggest that promoting self-care may be more effective in improving mental health than interventions aimed at improving coping.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":50740,"journal":{"name":"Applied Nursing Research","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.7000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S089718972400048X/pdfft?md5=e785626790816a28b149cd5019709f67&pid=1-s2.0-S089718972400048X-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Does self-care improve coping or does coping improve self-care? A structural equation modeling study\",\"authors\":\"Barbara Riegel PhD, RN, FAHA, FAAN ,&nbsp;Claudio Barbaranelli PhD ,&nbsp;Michael A. Stawnychy PhD, RN ,&nbsp;Austin Matus PhD, RN ,&nbsp;Karen B. Hirschman PhD, MSW, FGSA\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.apnr.2024.151810\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Support interventions often address both self-care and coping. Different approaches are used to promote self-care and coping so clarifying the intervention effect can guide clinicians and researchers to provide interventions that achieve benefit.</p></div><div><h3>Purpose</h3><p>To compare two models to determine whether self-care improves coping or coping improves self-care.</p></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><p>We used cross-sectional data from 248 caregivers obtained at enrollment into a randomized controlled trial testing the efficacy of a support intervention. Factor scores for scales measuring caregiver demand, self-care, coping, stress appraisal, and mental health were derived from exploratory factor analysis. Structural equation models were analyzed using the factor scores as estimates of each construct. To control possible spurious effects caregiver age, gender, relationship with the patient, and income adequacy were included.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>Both models were compatible with the data, but the self-care model was stronger than the coping model. That model had a non-significant chi square and an excellent fit to the data, χ<sup>2</sup>(4, <em>N</em> = 248) = 2.64, <em>p</em> = .62. The percentage of variance explained by the self-care model was 54 % for mental health, 42 % for stress appraisal, 10 % for avoidance coping, and 6 % for active coping. In the coping model the explained variance of stress appraisal dropped to 33 %, avoidance coping dropped to 0 %, and active coping dropped to 3 %.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>The self-care model was strongest, illustrating that self-care decreases stress, promotes coping, and improves mental health. These results suggest that promoting self-care may be more effective in improving mental health than interventions aimed at improving coping.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":50740,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Applied Nursing Research\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.7000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-13\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S089718972400048X/pdfft?md5=e785626790816a28b149cd5019709f67&pid=1-s2.0-S089718972400048X-main.pdf\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Applied Nursing Research\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S089718972400048X\",\"RegionNum\":4,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"NURSING\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Nursing Research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S089718972400048X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"NURSING","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景支持性干预通常涉及自我护理和应对。目的比较两种模式,以确定是自我护理提高了应对能力,还是应对能力提高了自我护理能力。方法我们使用了 248 名护理者的横截面数据,这些数据是在一项随机对照试验中获得的,该试验测试了支持性干预措施的效果。通过探索性因子分析得出了测量护理人员需求、自我护理、应对、压力评估和心理健康的量表因子得分。使用因子得分作为每个结构的估计值,对结构方程模型进行分析。为了控制可能存在的虚假影响,将照顾者的年龄、性别、与病人的关系和收入是否充足也包括在内。结果两个模型都与数据相符,但自我照顾模型强于应对模型。该模型的卡方不显著,与数据的拟合度很高,χ2(4,N = 248)= 2.64,p = .62。自我保健模型所解释的方差百分比为:心理健康 54%,压力评估 42%,回避应对 10%,积极应对 6%。在应对模式中,压力评估的解释变异下降到 33%,回避应对下降到 0%,积极应对下降到 3%。这些结果表明,在改善心理健康方面,促进自我保健可能比旨在改善应对的干预措施更有效。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Does self-care improve coping or does coping improve self-care? A structural equation modeling study

Background

Support interventions often address both self-care and coping. Different approaches are used to promote self-care and coping so clarifying the intervention effect can guide clinicians and researchers to provide interventions that achieve benefit.

Purpose

To compare two models to determine whether self-care improves coping or coping improves self-care.

Methods

We used cross-sectional data from 248 caregivers obtained at enrollment into a randomized controlled trial testing the efficacy of a support intervention. Factor scores for scales measuring caregiver demand, self-care, coping, stress appraisal, and mental health were derived from exploratory factor analysis. Structural equation models were analyzed using the factor scores as estimates of each construct. To control possible spurious effects caregiver age, gender, relationship with the patient, and income adequacy were included.

Results

Both models were compatible with the data, but the self-care model was stronger than the coping model. That model had a non-significant chi square and an excellent fit to the data, χ2(4, N = 248) = 2.64, p = .62. The percentage of variance explained by the self-care model was 54 % for mental health, 42 % for stress appraisal, 10 % for avoidance coping, and 6 % for active coping. In the coping model the explained variance of stress appraisal dropped to 33 %, avoidance coping dropped to 0 %, and active coping dropped to 3 %.

Conclusions

The self-care model was strongest, illustrating that self-care decreases stress, promotes coping, and improves mental health. These results suggest that promoting self-care may be more effective in improving mental health than interventions aimed at improving coping.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Applied Nursing Research
Applied Nursing Research 医学-护理
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
0.00%
发文量
65
审稿时长
70 days
期刊介绍: Applied Nursing Research presents original, peer-reviewed research findings clearly and directly for clinical applications in all nursing specialties. Regular features include "Ask the Experts," research briefs, clinical methods, book reviews, news and announcements, and an editorial section. Applied Nursing Research covers such areas as pain management, patient education, discharge planning, nursing diagnosis, job stress in nursing, nursing influence on length of hospital stay, and nurse/physician collaboration.
×
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