Brain Injury Rehabilitation Research Group, Ingham Institute for Applied Medical Research, Liverpool, Sydney; Liverpool Brain Injury Rehabilitation Unit, Liverpool Hospital, Sydney.
School of Nursing and Health, Avondale University, Sydney.
Arch Phys Med Rehabil. 2021 Dec;102(12):2325-2334. doi: 10.1016/j.apmr.2021.06.016. Epub 2021 Aug 3.
To test a model comprising explanatory (neurologic impairment, coping, personality) and mediating (resilience, self-efficacy, hope, social support) variables on psychological adjustment and burden among family caregivers of individuals with traumatic brain injury (TBI) vs spinal cord injury (SCI).
Structural equation modeling with multigroup analysis.
Six rehabilitation centers across New South Wales and Queensland, Australia.
A total of 181 family members (N=181; 131 TBI, 50 SCI).
Not applicable.
Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, Eysenck Personality Questionnaire, Ways of Coping Questionnaire, General Self-Efficacy Scale, Herth Hope Scale, Medical Outcome Study Social Support Survey; and 4 measures of psychological adjustment including: Caregiver Burden Scale, Medical Outcomes Survey Short Form-36 (SF-36), General Health Questionnaire-28, and Positive and Negative Affect Scale.
The model for the aggregated sample demonstrated a very good model fit (χ=47.42, df=39, ρ=0.167, normed fit index=.962, incremental fit index=.993, Tucker-Lewis index=.985, comparative fit index=.993, root-mean-squared error of approximation=.035). Multi-group analysis found significant commonalities in the pattern of relationships among variables across the 2 groups. In the only differences found, neuroticism was significantly more influential on burden in family members supporting individuals with TBI than family members of individuals with SCI. Furthermore, problem-focused coping was statistically more influential on positive affect in family members of individuals with TBI when compared with family members of individuals with SCI.
The study found significant similarities in the patterns of resilience and psychological adjustment among family caregivers of individuals with TBI and SCI.
测试一个包含解释性（神经损伤、应对方式、人格）和中介性（韧性、自我效能感、希望、社会支持）变量的模型，以检验创伤性脑损伤（TBI）和脊髓损伤（SCI）患者家属的心理调整和负担情况。
结构方程模型与多组分析。
澳大利亚新南威尔士州和昆士兰州的 6 个康复中心。
共 181 名家庭成员（N=181；131 例 TBI，50 例 SCI）。
无。
Connor-Davidson 韧性量表、艾森克人格问卷、应对方式问卷、一般自我效能感量表、赫尔思希望量表、医疗结局研究社会支持量表；以及 4 项心理调整指标，包括：照顾者负担量表、医疗结局研究 36 项简明健康调查（SF-36）、一般健康问卷-28 项、正性和负性情绪量表。
综合样本模型拟合度非常好（χ=47.42，df=39，ρ=0.167，标准化拟合指数=0.962，增量拟合指数=0.993，Tucker-Lewis 指数=0.985，比较拟合指数=0.993，根均方误差近似值=0.035）。多组分析发现，两组间变量间关系模式存在显著共性。在唯一发现的差异中，神经质对支持 TBI 患者的家庭成员的负担影响明显大于支持 SCI 患者的家庭成员。此外，与支持 SCI 患者的家庭成员相比，问题聚焦应对方式对 TBI 患者家庭成员的积极情绪影响更大。
该研究发现，TBI 和 SCI 患者家属的韧性和心理调整模式存在显著相似性。
