期刊论文详细信息
Health and Quality of Life Outcomes
Role of self-efficacy and social support in short-term recovery after total hip replacement: a prospective cohort study
Research
Heidi Kapstad1  Hilde Eide1  Espen Andreas Brembo2  Sandra Van Dulmen3 
[1] Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, University College of Southeast Norway, P.O Box 7053, 3007, Papirbredden - Drammen kunnskapspark Grønland 58, 3045, Drammen, Norway;Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, University College of Southeast Norway, P.O Box 7053, 3007, Papirbredden - Drammen kunnskapspark Grønland 58, 3045, Drammen, Norway;Department of Behavioral Sciences in Medicine, Institute of Basic Medical Sciences, Faculty of Medicine, University of Oslo, Sognsvannsveien 9, 0372, Oslo, Norway;Faculty of Health and Social Sciences, University College of Southeast Norway, P.O Box 7053, 3007, Papirbredden - Drammen kunnskapspark Grønland 58, 3045, Drammen, Norway;NIVEL (Netherlands institute for health services research), Otterstraat 118-124, 3513 CR, Utrecht, The Netherlands;Department of Primary and Community Care, Radboud University Medical Center, Geert Grooteplein noord 21, 6525 EZ, Nijmegen, The Netherlands;
关键词: Osteoarthritis;    Psychosocial predictors;    Total hip replacement;    Social support;    Self-efficacy;    WOMAC;   
DOI  :  10.1186/s12955-017-0649-1
 received in 2016-09-28, accepted in 2017-04-05,  发布年份 2017
来源: Springer
PDF
【 摘 要 】

BackgroundDespite the overall success of total hip replacement (THR) in patients with symptomatic osteoarthritis (OA), up to one-quarter of patients report suboptimal recovery. The aim of this study was to determine whether social support and general self-efficacy predict variability in short-term recovery in a Norwegian cohort.MethodsWe performed secondary analysis of a prospective multicenter study of 223 patients who underwent THR for OA in 2003–2004. The total score of the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) at 3 months after surgery was used as the recovery variable. We measured self-efficacy using the General Self-Efficacy Scale (GSES) and social support with the Social Provisions Scale (SPS). Preoperative and postoperative scores were compared using Wilcoxon tests. The Mann–Whitney U test compared scores between groups that differed in gender and age. Spearman’s rho correlation coefficients were used to evaluate associations between selected predictor variables and the recovery variable. We performed univariate and multiple linear regression analyses to identify independent variables and their ability to predict short-term recovery after THR.ResultsThe median preoperative WOMAC score was 58.3 before and 23.9 after surgery. The mean absolute change was 31.9 (standard deviation [SD] 17.0) and the mean relative change was 54.8% (SD 26.6). Older age, female gender, higher educational level, number of comorbidities, baseline WOMAC score, self-efficacy, and three of six individual provisions correlated significantly with short-term recovery after THR and predicted the variability in recovery in the univariate regression model. In multiple regression models, baseline WOMAC was the most consistent predictor of short-term recovery: a higher preoperative WOMAC score predicted worse short-term recovery (β = 0.44 [0.29, 0.59]). Higher self-efficacy predicted better recovery (β = −0.44 [−0.87, −0.02]). Reliable alliance was a significant predictor of improved recovery (β = −1.40 [−2.81, 0.01]).ConclusionsOA patients’ general self-efficacy and the expectation of others’ tangible assistance predict recovery after THR. Researchers and clinicians should target these psychosocial factors together with the patients and their families to improve the quality of care and surgical outcomes.

【 授权许可】

CC BY   
© The Author(s). 2017

【 预 览 】
附件列表
Files Size Format View
RO202311109289714ZK.pdf 688KB PDF download
【 参考文献 】
  • [1]
  • [2]
  • [3]
  • [4]
  • [5]
  • [6]
  • [7]
  • [8]
  • [9]
  • [10]
  • [11]
  • [12]
  • [13]
  • [14]
  • [15]
  • [16]
  • [17]
  • [18]
  • [19]
  • [20]
  • [21]
  • [22]
  • [23]
  • [24]
  • [25]
  • [26]
  • [27]
  • [28]
  • [29]
  • [30]
  • [31]
  • [32]
  • [33]
  • [34]
  • [35]
  • [36]
  • [37]
  • [38]
  • [39]
  • [40]
  • [41]
  • [42]
  • [43]
  • [44]
  • [45]
  • [46]
  • [47]
  • [48]
  • [49]
  • [50]
  • [51]
  • [52]
  文献评价指标  
  下载次数:6次 浏览次数:1次