Li L, Wu X L, Xu L
Department of Burns, Fujian Medical University Union Hospital, Fuzhou 350001, China.
Zhonghua Shao Shang Za Zhi. 2018 Jul 20;34(7):486-491. doi: 10.3760/cma.j.issn.1009-2587.2018.07.012.
To investigate current status of acceptance of disability and hope level in burn patients and the correlation. Totally 216 hospitalized burn patients conforming to the study criteria were admitted to Department of Burns of Fujian Medical University Union Hospital from September 2016 to May 2017. Self-made General Information Questionnaire, Acceptance of Disability Scale-Revised and Herth Hope Index score were adopted to investigate condition of acceptance of disability and hope level of burn patients with different general information and to record the score, score of acceptance of disability and the dimensions, score of hope level and the dimensions of 216 patients. Correlation between scores of acceptance of disability and hope level and their dimensions was analyzed. Data were processed with test, one-way analysis of variance, and Pearson correlation analysis. (1) Scores of acceptance of disability and hope level of patients with different age, gender, and relationship status were close (=-1.299, -0.249, -1.142, -0.315, =1.168, 2.362, >0.05). There were statistically significant differences in score of acceptance of disability and hope level of patients with different burn sequela, inhalation injury, education level, population category, home address, burn degree, and burn depth (=9.581, 7.854, -8.385, -7.972, =2.989, 2.958, 7.759, 4.928, 8.099, 8.489, 44.942, 32.071, 8.221, 5.570, <0.05 or <0.01). (2) Score of acceptance of disability of patients was (70.4±19.0) points, which was in medium level. Among 4 dimensions of acceptance of disability of patients, dimension of expansion of values scope had the highest score [(22.1±6.0) points], and it was followed by dimension of transformation from comparison value to fixed value [(20.1±5.9) points] and dimension of tolerance for disability's influence [(18.9±6.3) points], and dimension of subordination to body shape had the lowest score [(9.3±2.8) points]. (3) Score of hope level of patients was (31.2±7.8) points, which was in medium level. Among 3 dimensions of hope level, dimension of keeping close relationship with other people had the highest score [(10.8±2.6) points], and it was followed by dimension of taking positive action [(10.6±2.5) points], and dimension of positive attitude to reality and future had the lowest score [(9.9±3.1) points]. (4) There were significantly positive correlations between scores of acceptance of disability and its dimensions and hope level and its dimensions of patients (with values from 0.522 to 0.884, <0.01). Burn patients with different general information have different scores of acceptance of disability and hope level. Acceptance of disability and hope level of patients with burns need to be improved, and there is significantly positive correlation between acceptance of disability and hope level.
调查烧伤患者对残疾的接受度及希望水平现状及其相关性。2016年9月至2017年5月，福建医科大学附属协和医院烧伤科共收治符合研究标准的住院烧伤患者216例。采用自制的一般资料问卷、修订版残疾接受度量表及赫思希望指数评分，对不同一般资料烧伤患者的残疾接受状况及希望水平进行调查，并记录216例患者的评分、残疾接受度评分及维度、希望水平评分及维度。分析残疾接受度评分与希望水平评分及其维度之间的相关性。数据采用t检验、单因素方差分析及Pearson相关分析进行处理。（1）不同年龄、性别、婚姻状况患者的残疾接受度评分及希望水平评分相近（t=-1.299，-0.249，-1.142，-0.315；P=1.168，2.362，P>0.05）。不同烧伤后遗症、吸入性损伤、文化程度、人口类别、家庭住址、烧伤程度、烧伤深度患者的残疾接受度评分及希望水平评分差异有统计学意义（F=9.581，7.854，-8.385，-7.972；P=2.989，2.958，7.759，4.928，8.099，8.489，44.942，32.071，8.221，5.570，P<0.05或P<0.01）。（2）患者残疾接受度评分为（70.4±19.0）分，处于中等水平。患者残疾接受度的4个维度中，价值范围扩展维度得分最高[（22.1±6.0）分]，其次为比较价值向固定价值转变维度[（20.1±5.9）分]和对残疾影响的容忍维度[（18.9±6.3）分]，从属于身体形态维度得分最低[（9.3±2.8）分]。（3）患者希望水平评分为（31.2±7.8）分，处于中等水平。希望水平的3个维度中，与他人保持密切关系维度得分最高[（10.8±2.6）分]，其次为采取积极行动维度[（10.6±2.5）分]，对现实和未来持积极态度维度得分最低[（9.9±3.1）分]。（4）患者残疾接受度评分及其维度与希望水平评分及其维度之间均呈显著正相关（r值为0.522～0.884，P<0.01）。不同一般资料的烧伤患者残疾接受度评分及希望水平不同。烧伤患者的残疾接受度及希望水平有待提高，且残疾接受度与希望水平之间呈显著正相关。
