Relationship between Social capital and Chronic illness self-management in Seoul, Korea

Social capital;Chronic illness self-management;Socioeconomic status(SES);614

보건대학원 보건학과(보건학전공) ;

University:서울대학교 대학원

关键词: Social capital;    Chronic illness self-management;    Socioeconomic status(SES);    614;   

Others  :  http://s-space.snu.ac.kr/bitstream/10371/128485/1/000000017541.pdf

美国|英语

来源: Seoul National University Open Repository

【 摘 要 】

and clarify the mediating effect of ;;satisfaction;;.Methods: The data used in this study came from the Korean Community Health Survey (KCHS) of 2011, and the region was restricted to 8 districts of Seoul. The subject criteria was ;;prevalence of hypertension and/or diabetes” and ;;adults aged 30 and above.” Following Putnam’s notion, social capital was defined in terms of ;;trust, reciprocity, networks, and participation,” and;;Taking medication, following non-medication therapy, and attending to self-management education” were set as management matters of chronic illness. Breslow-Day test and Mantel-Haenszel test were used in SES stratification analysis, and mediating effect of ;;satisfaction” was analyzed based on Baron & Kenny’s approach. Logistic regression was performed for analyzing adjusted association between variables. All analytic processes were performed using the statistical program SAS version 9.3.Results: Hypertension patients were mostly dependent on medication for self-care, rather diabetes group attempted to manage their disease with more diverse manners including attending education. Generally, comorbidity group indicated better self-management aspects than those with single disease. Intimate and homogenous ties were predominant among participation (e.g. friendship activities: 56.97%) and network (e.g. family network: 79.26%). There are significant differences between social capital and self-management distribution by SES and several combinations indicate positive effect for high SES group only. And ;;satisfaction” came into mediator between ;;trust” and ;;non-medication.” After adjustment for confounding factors, ;;network” still had association with ;;medication” (OR 1.46, 95%CI 0.93-2.28, p<0.1), and ;;participation” with ;;non-Medication” (OR 1.38, 95%CI 1.03-1.84, p<0.05). Conclusion: The structural social capital comprised of participation and network, tend to have positive effects on chronic illness self-management than cognitive social capital based on trust and reciprocity. The distribution and effectiveness of social capital and self-management manner depend on SES. In other words, high SES group manage chronic condition using their social resources (e.g. social capital and SES itself) properly, while low SES group have difficulty in achieving benefit of social capital due to a lack of their capacity. That is, low SES could be a barrier to take advantage of social capital on self-management, and it can broaden the health inequality between SES groups. We need to understand social context for chronic illness self-management and bring social capital strategies into self-management paradigm for enhancing patients;; efficacy and management efficiency.