目的 调查重度烧伤患者家庭亲密度和适应性、社交回避和苦恼的现状,探讨二者的相关性,为制定干预措施提供依据。方法 2013年1月至2015年6月,对出院后来门诊复查的289例重度烧伤患者进行现场问卷调查,包括自行设计的一般情况调查表、中文版家庭亲密度和适应性量表(FACESⅡ)、社交回避及苦恼量表(SADS),进行Pearson相关分析。结果 重度烧伤患者家庭实际亲密度、实际适应性均明显低于国内常模(t>3.830, P<0.01),理想亲密度、亲密度不满意程度、理想适应性、适应性不满意程度均明显高于国内常模(t>3.857, P<0.01);SADS得分明显高于常模。重度烧伤患者家庭实际亲密度、实际适应性、FACESⅡ总分与SADS各项评分均呈负相关(P<0.05),家庭亲密度不满意程度、适应性不满意程度与SADS评分均呈正相关(P<0.05)。结论 重度烧伤患者存在较为严重的社交回避和苦恼,可能受家庭亲密度和适应性下降影响。应采取有针对性的护理措施。
Objective To investigate the situation of family intimacy and adaptability, and social avoidance and distress in severe burn patients, and explore the correlation between them, so as to provide basis for intervention. Methods From January, 2013 to June, 2015, 289 patients with severe burn were surveyed with self-designed general condition questionnaire, Family Adaptability and Cohesion Evaluation Scale (FACES II) and Social Avoidance and Distress Scale (SADS), and analyed with Pearson correlation analysis. Results The real family intimacy and adaptability were lower in the severe burn patients than in national norm (t>3.830, P<0.01), and the ideal family intimacy, dissatisfied intimacy level, ideal adaptability and dissatisfied adaptability level were higher in the severe burn patients than in national norm (t>3.857, P<0.01). The SADS score was higher in the severe burn patients than in national norm. The real intimacy, real adaptability and the total score of FACES II negatively correlated with the scores of SADS (P<0.05), while the levels of dissatisfied intimacy and adaptability positively correlated (P<0.05). Conclusion The social avoidance and distress exist in severe burn patients, which may associated with the family intimacy and adaptability, that some interventions may target to.
[1] 梁执群,卢莉,籍继颖,等. 某医科大学学生社交回避及苦恼的相关因素研究[J]. 中国学校卫生, 2004, 25(3): 318-319
[2] 李红英,张芬,王红霞. 心理干预对重度烧伤病人社交回避与苦恼的影响[J]. 护理研究, 2012, 26(10): 2653-2654.
[3] Low JF, Dyster-Aas J, Willebrand M, et al. Chronic nightmares after severe burns: risk factors and implications for treatment [J]. J Burn Care Rehabil, 2003, 24(4): 260-267.
[4] 杨宗城. 烧伤治疗学[M]. 3版. 北京:人民卫生出版社,2006：10-15.
[5] Olsen DH, Gorall DM. FACESIV & the Circumplex Model [EB/OL]. http://www.facesiv.com.1982.
[6] 费立鹏,沈其杰,郑延平,等. “家庭亲密度和适应性量表”和“家庭环境量表”的初步评价[J].中国心理卫生杂志, 1991, 5(5): 198-203.
[7] 汪向东,王希林,马弘,等. 心理卫生评定量表手册[M]. 增订版. 北京:中国心理卫生杂志社,1999.
[8] 肖水源. 社会支持评定量表[J]. 中国心理卫生杂志,1993, 7(增刊): 42-43.
[9] 张明,高伟,杨文华,等. 银屑病患者社交回避及苦恼与应对方式社会支持相关性研究[J]. 护理学报, 2014, 21(1): 5-7.
[10] 侯胜群,陆箴琦,裘佳佳. 乳腺癌患者社交状况及其影响因素的调查[J]. 护理学杂志, 2015, 30(18): 80-82.
[11] 林雄标,胡纪泽. 社交恐怖症患者的认知特征及相关因素[J]. 中国心理卫生杂志, 2003, 17(6): 423-425.
[12] 夏哲远,余爽,孔悦,等. 烧伤患者社交回避及苦恼与伤残接受度的相关性研究[J]. 中国实用护理杂志, 2014, 30(31): 27-30.
[13] 李红英,张芬,王红霞. 心理干预对重度烧伤病人社交回避与苦恼的影响[J]. 护理研究, 2012, 26(10): 2653-2654.
[14] 程华,李孝件,曹雯娟,等. 教育程度与烧伤面积及应对行为对重度烧伤患者并发心理障碍的影响[J]. 中华烧伤杂志, 2013, 29(2): 195-200.
[15] 王珍珍. 不同程度伤残患者家庭亲密度及适应性与自尊关系的临床研究[J]. 中国实用护理杂志, 2013, 29(9): 60-61.
[16] 程金贵,吕复莉,余正琴,等. 脑瘫患儿家庭亲密度和适应性的现状研究[J]. 中国实用护理杂志, 2015, 31(22): 1652-1656.
[17] 陶花,林征,黄晓萍,等. 青少年型糖尿病患者生活质量与家庭亲密度和适应性的相关性研究[J]. 护理学杂志, 2013, 28(9): 42-44.
[18] 惠敏,曹惠贞,郑建伟. 应对方式、家庭亲密度和适应性与乳腺癌患者自尊的关系[J]. 中华护理杂志, 2011, 46(9): 901-902.
[19] Blakeney PE, Rosenberg L, Rosenberg M. Psychological care of persons with severe burns [J]. Burns, 2008, 34(8): 433-440.
[20] Windle G, Markland DA, Woods RT. Examination of a theoretical model of psychological resilience in older age [J]. Aging Ment Health, 2008, 12(3): 285-292.
[21] Yu XN, Lau JT, Mak WW, et al. Factor structure and psychometric properties of the Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale among Chinese adolescents [J]. Compr Psychiatry, 2011, 52(2): 218-224.
[22] Peel SL. The lived experience of resilience for victims of traumatic vehicular accidents: a phenomenological study [D]. Minneapolis: Capella University, 2001.
[23] 吴令波. 烧伤患者家庭功能与社会适应能力的关系[J]. 广东医学, 2011, 32(7): 911-913.
[24] 贾赤宇,龙艺. 烧伤患者心理社交的复原与回归(续三)[J/CD]. 中华损伤与修复杂志电子版, 2011, 6(1): 138-143.
[25] 中华医学会烧伤外科学分会,中国医师协会烧伤科医师分会. 烧伤康复治疗指南(2013版)[J]. 中华烧伤杂志, 2013, 29(6): 497-504.
