González-Freire Beatriz, Vázquez-Rodríguez Isabel, Marcos-Velázquez Pedro, de la Cuesta Carlos González
Facultad de Psicología, Universidad de Santiago de Compostela, Campus Universitario Sur, 15782, Santiago de Compostela, Spain.
J Clin Psychol Med Settings. 2010 Sep;17(3):220-9. doi: 10.1007/s10880-010-9198-z.
The objectives of this study were to (a) determine prevalence of the dispositional repressive coping style as well as other situational coping styles in a sample of asthmatic patients and (b) to analyze the capacity of these styles to predict subsequent morbidity (emergency room visits or hospitalizations due to asthma) during a 12-month follow-up. A sample of 75 adult asthmatic patients was selected and information about sociodemographics, asthma severity, and patient's perception of illness severity was collected. Repressive coping style was defined by a combination of scores obtained on the Trait Anxiety Inventory and the Marlowe-Crowne Social Desirability Scale. Coping styles were assessed with the dispositional version of the Coping Orientation to Problems Experienced Inventory. Eighteen patients (24%) were classified as repressors. Repressor asthmatics obtained scores significantly lower on Emotion-Focused Coping compared to non-repressors (F ((1,72)) = 5.15, p = .026). Patients who perceived their asthma as severe reported to use Emotion-Focused Coping more than those who judged it as mild or moderate (F ((2,71)) = 4.83, p = .011). A higher use of Denial (an Emotion-Focused strategy of coping) explained 8% of variance of the frequency of emergency room visits during the 12-month follow-up. The prevalence of repressive coping style in the asthmatic population is similar to that registered in other populations of chronic patients, and it is also associated with the tendency to report a lower use of strategies traditionally considered as maladaptive. The use of Emotion-Focused Coping strategies seems to be related to a worse perception of the physical status, and among this group of strategies, Denial also could favor a poor clinical course in bronchial asthma.
(a) 确定哮喘患者样本中特质性压抑应对方式以及其他情境应对方式的流行情况；(b) 分析这些应对方式在12个月随访期间预测后续发病率（因哮喘导致的急诊就诊或住院）的能力。选取了75名成年哮喘患者样本，并收集了有关社会人口统计学、哮喘严重程度以及患者对疾病严重程度认知的信息。压抑应对方式由特质焦虑量表和马洛-克劳恩社会赞许性量表的得分组合来定义。应对方式通过应对问题经验取向量表的特质版本进行评估。18名患者（24%）被归类为压抑者。与非压抑者相比，压抑型哮喘患者在以情绪为中心的应对方式上得分显著更低（F((1,72)) = 5.15，p = .026）。认为自己哮喘严重的患者报告使用以情绪为中心的应对方式比那些认为病情为轻度或中度的患者更多（F((2,71)) = 4.83，p = .011）。更高频率地使用否认（一种以情绪为中心的应对策略）解释了12个月随访期间急诊就诊频率变异的8%。哮喘人群中压抑应对方式的流行情况与其他慢性病患者群体中记录的情况相似，并且它还与报告较少使用传统上被认为是适应不良策略的倾向相关。使用以情绪为中心的应对策略似乎与对身体状况的更差认知有关，并且在这组策略中，否认也可能不利于支气管哮喘的临床病程。
