| 魏燕妮,韦玲,吕虹.烧伤康复期患者自我隐瞒与社交回避及苦恼的交叉滞后分析[J].上海护理,2026,26(3): |
| 烧伤康复期患者自我隐瞒与社交回避及苦恼的交叉滞后分析 |
|
| 投稿时间：2024-12-04 修订日期：2026-03-02 |
| DOI： |
| 中文关键词: 烧伤 康复期 自我隐瞒 社交回避及苦恼 交叉滞后模型 |
| 英文关键词:Burn Recovery period Self-concealment Social avoidance and distress Cross-lagged model |
| 基金项目:江西省卫生健康委科技计划(编号:202410696) |
|
| 摘要点击次数: 950 |
| 全文下载次数: 0 |
| 中文摘要: |
| 目的 探讨烧伤康复期患者自我隐瞒与社交回避及苦恼的变化趋势及二者间的预测关系。方法 2021年1月至2024年1月，采用方便抽样方法选取九江学院附属医院收治的280例烧伤康复期患者作为研究对象。采用一般资料调查表、自我隐瞒量表（SCS）、社交回避及苦恼量表（SADS）对其进行为期6个月的追踪调查，共进行3次评估（T1：基线；T2：T1后3个月；T3：T1后6个月）。构建交叉滞后模型，分析患者自我隐瞒与社交回避及苦恼间的变化趋势及其双向预测关系。结果 重复测量方差分析显示，患者在 T1、T2、T3 3个时间点的 SCS 得分[分别为（44.30±2.69）分、（30.14±3.20）分、（16.41±3.48）]和 SADS 得分[分别为 （25.89±2.37）分、（18.49±3.19）分、（10.25±3.59）]均存在时间效应（P＜0.05），且两项得分均随康复时间延长而递减（T1＞T2＞T3）。皮尔逊相关分析显示，3个时间点的 SCS 得分与 SADS 得分均呈正相关（P＜0.05）。交叉滞后模型结果显示，SCS（T1）可正向预测SADS（T2）（β=0.143，P＜0.05）；SADS（T1）可正向预测SCS（T2）（β=0.164，P＜0.05）；SCS（T2）可正向预测SADS（T3）（β=0.155，P＜0.05）；SADS（T2）可正向预测SCS（T3）（β=0.237，P＜0.05）。结论 烧伤康复期患者的自我隐瞒、社交回避及苦恼水平随康复时间延长呈递减趋势，且两者存在相互的、跨时间点的正向预测关系。临床上应重视对烧伤康复期患者的心理干预，帮助患者降低自我隐瞒水平，改善社交回避及苦恼状况，以促进其全面康复。 |
| 英文摘要: |
| Objective To investigate the change trends of self-concealment and social avoidance and distress in patients during the burn recovery period, as well as the predictive relationship between them. Methods From January 2021 to January 2024, a convenience sampling method was used to select 280 patients in the burn recovery period treated at Jiujiang University Affiliated Hospital as research subjects. A general information questionnaire, the Self-Concealment Scale (SCS), and the Social Avoidance and Distress Scale (SADS) were used to conduct a 6-month follow-up survey on these patients, with three assessments carried out (T1: baseline; T2: 3 months after T1; T3: 6 months after T1). A cross-lagged model was constructed to analyze the change trends and bidirectional predictive relationships between self-concealment and social avoidance and distress. Results Repeated-measures analysis of variance showed that the SCS scores [(44.30 ± 2.69) at T1, (30.14 ± 3.20) at T2, and (16.41 ± 3.48) at T3] and SADS scores [(25.89 ± 2.37) at T1, (18.49 ± 3.19) at T2, and (10.25 ± 3.59) at T3] of the patients had significant time effects (P<0.05), and both scores decreased progressively with the extension of the recovery period (T1>T2>T3). Pearson correlation analysis indicated that the SCS scores were positively correlated with the SADS scores at all three time points (P<0.05). The cross-lagged model results showed that SCS (T1) positively predicted SADS (T2) (β=0.143, P<0.05); SADS (T1) positively predicted SCS (T2) (β=0.164, P<0.05); SCS (T2) positively predicted SADS (T3) (β=0.155, P<0.05); and SADS (T2) positively predicted SCS (T3) (β=0.237, P<0.05). Conclusion The levels of self-concealment, social avoidance, and distress in patients during the burn recovery period decrease progressively with the extension of the recovery period, and there is a mutual, cross-time-point positive predictive relationship between them. Clinically, psychological interventions for patients in the burn recovery period should be emphasized to help reduce self-concealment levels and improve social avoidance and distress, thereby promoting their comprehensive recovery. |
| 查看全文 查看/发表评论 下载PDF阅读器 |
| 关闭 |
|
|
|