A study on the effect of solution focused approach on the acceptance of disability in patients with spinal cord injury with paraplegia

doi:10.3877/cma.j.issn.2096-0263.2021.02.005

Abstract

Abstract:

Objective

To explore the effect of solution focused approach on the acceptance of disability in patients with spinal cord injury combined with paraplegia, to improve the patient's acceptance of disability.

Methods

Totally 64 patients with spinal cord injury combined with paraplegia were randomly divided into the experimental group and the control group with 32 cases in each group. The experimental group received the solution focused approach on the basis of routine nursing, while the control group patient only received routine nursing. Acceptance of disability scale, Self-feeling burden scale and hospital anxiety and depression scale were used to evaluate the intervention effect at different time.

Results

After 3 months of intervention, the dimensions of expansion, obedience, control, transformation and total scores of disability Acceptance Scale in the experimental group were significantly higher than those in the control group (all P<0.05). The self-feeling burden score and the total anxiety and depression score of the experimental group were significantly lower than those of the control group (t=5.263, P<0.05; t=3.613, P<0.05). Before intervention, there was no statistical difference between the two groups (P>0.05). After 3 months of intervention, the total score of disability acceptance in the experimental group was significantly higher than that before intervention (Z=-3.946, P<0.05), while the difference before and after intervention in the control group was no statistically significant (P>0.05).

Conclusion

Solution Focused Approach can improve the acceptance of disability and reduce the patient's self-feeling burden and anxiety and depression levels in patients with spinal cord injury combined with paraplegia.

Key words: Psychotherapy, Spinal cord injuries, Disabled persons

Yuantong Zang, Litian Zhang, Meiying Yang, Xiaojuan Zhao, Li Li. A study on the effect of solution focused approach on the acceptance of disability in patients with spinal cord injury with paraplegia[J]. Chinese Journal of Geriatric Orthopaedics and Rehabilitation(Electronic Edition), 2021, 07(02): 93-98.

/ / Recommend

Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX

URL: https://zhlngkykfdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/10.3877/cma.j.issn.2096-0263.2021.02.005

https://zhlngkykfdzzz.cma-cmc.com.cn/EN/Y2021/V07/I02/93

Figures/Tables 5

References 25

1	Bond C, Woods K, Humphrey N, et al. Practitioner review: The effectiveness of solution focused brief therapy with children and families: A systematic and critical evaluation of the literature from 1990-2010 [J]. J Child Psychol Psychiatry, 2013, 54(7): 707-723.
2	Shuttlewood E.a, Nash J. A solution-focused approach to diabetes-related distress [J]. Journal of Diabetes Nursing, 2016, 20(3): 102-107.
3	Sophia T, Nicole E, Lynn Z, et al. Helping Spouses Cope with Partners Coming Out: A Solution-Focused Approach [J]. Am J Fam Ther, 2008, 36(1): 30-47.
4	Nurcan Akgül Gündoğdu, Handan Zincir, Nuran Güler. Solution Focused Approach and Usage on Nursing [J]. JCBPR, 2016, 5(3): 145-152.
5	World Health Organization, International classification of functioning [M]. Geneva: World Health Organization, 2001.
6	Dziura J. Psychological well-being, acceptance of disability and perceived social support in US military veterans with acquired hearing loss [D]. Washington, D. C, Gallaudet University, 2017.
7	陈令红，李薇，胡铭.聚焦解决模式在缓解脊髓损伤合并截瘫患者负性情绪中的应用及效果评价[J].中华护理杂志, 2016, 51(11): 1297-1301.
8	linkowski D. A scale to measure acceptance of disability [J]. Rehabil Couns Bull, 1971, 14(4): 236-244.
9	Chao HL, Tsai TY, Livneh H, et al. Patients with colorectal cancer: relationship between demographic and disease characteristics and acceptance of disability [J]. J Adv Nurs, 2010, 66(10): 2278-2286.
10	Natalie Cousineau, Ian McDowell, Steve Hot, et al. Measuring Chronic Patients'Feelings of Being a Burden to their Caregivers: Development and Preliminary Validation of a Scale [J]. Medical Care, 2003, 41(1).
11	武燕燕，姜亚芳.癌症患者自我感受负担的调查与分析[J].护理管理杂志, 2010, 10(06): 405-407.
12	Zigmond A. S., Snaith R. P.. The Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale [J]. Acta Psychiatr Scand, 1983, 67(6): 361-370.
13	施红梅.脊髓损伤患者情绪状态与活动和参与功能研究[J].中国康复理论与实践, 2017, 23(8): 946-949.
14	McDonald SD, Mickens MN, Goldberg-Looney LD, et al. Mental disorder prevalence among U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs outpatients with spinal cord injuries [J]. J Spinal Cord Med, 2018, 41(6): 691-702.
15	Fann JR, Bombardier CH, Richards JS, et al, Venlafaxine extended-release for depression following spinal cord injury: a randomized clinical trial [J]. JAMA Psychiatry, 2015, 72(3): 247-58.
16	Zhang X, Liu Y, Deng X, et al. The Correlation Between Quality of Life and Acceptability of Disability in Patients With Facial Burn Scars [J]. Front Bioeng Biotech, 2019, 14(7): 329.
17	侯艳.脊髓损伤神经源性膀胱临床评估及治疗的研究进展[J].中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2019, 5(4): 238-244.
18	王玉明，宫慧明，孙青,等.慢性脊髓损伤患者与闲暇时间身体活动[J].中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2018, 4(6): 378-381.
19	朱晓东，徐锡明，董立薇,等.脊髓损伤后神经源性异位骨化的危险因素分析[J].中华老年骨科与康复电子杂志, 2015, (1): 28-33.
20	Kreier F, Genco ŞM, Boreel M, et al. An individual, community-based treatment for obese children and their families: the solution-focused approach [J]. Obes Facts, 2013, 6(5): 424-32.
21	Greenwood Deborah A, Ross Tami A, Reifsnider Elizabeth. Applying a Solution-Focused Approach to Life With Diabetes: Insights Gleaned via Twitter [J]. Diabetes Educ, 2020, XX(X): 1-10.
22	O′connell B, Solution-Focused therapy [M]. London: Sage, 1998: 2-3.
23	Carter B. Kicking Eeyore into touch: 'living-strong', 'nursing-strong' and being appreciative and solution-focused [J]. Contemp Nurse, 2007, 23(2): 181-188.
24	Hall O. Trent, McGrath Ryan P, Peterson Mark D, et al. The Burden of Traumatic Spinal Cord Injury in the United States: Disability-Adjusted Life Years [J]. Arch Phys Med Rehab, 2019, 100(1): 95-100.
25	Omer S, Golden E, Priebe S. Exploring the Mechanisms of a Patient-Centred Assessment with a Solution Focused Approach (DIALOG+) in the Community Treatment of Patients with Psychosis: A Process Evaluation within a Cluster-Ran domised Controlled Trial [J]. PLoS One, 2016, 11(2): e0148415.

组别	例数	性别（例）		年龄（岁，±s）	文化程度（例）		婚姻状况（例）		医疗支付方式（例）
组别	例数	男	女	年龄（岁，±s）	初中以下	高中以上	未婚	已婚	自费	医保
对照组	32	27	5	37±11	10	22	7	25	14	18
干预组	32	25	7	34±11	8	24	9	23	19	13
统计值		χ²=0.410		t=0.941	χ²=0.309		χ²=0.333		χ²=1.564
P值		0.522		0.350	0.578		0.564		0.211

组别	例数	性别（例）		年龄（岁，±s）	文化程度（例）		婚姻状况（例）		医疗支付方式（例）
组别	例数	男	女	年龄（岁，±s）	初中以下	高中以上	未婚	已婚	自费	医保
对照组	32	27	5	37±11	10	22	7	25	14	18
干预组	32	25	7	34±11	8	24	9	23	19	13
统计值		χ²=0.410		t=0.941	χ²=0.309		χ²=0.333		χ²=1.564
P值		0.522		0.350	0.578		0.564		0.211

组别	例数	扩大维度		t值	P值	服从维度		t值	P值	控制维度		t值	P值
组别	例数	干预前	干预后	t值	P值	干预前	干预后	t值	P值	干预前	干预后	t值	P值
对照组	32	46±13	51±15	-1.532	0.131	13±6	16±6	-2.014	0.051	43±19	45±19	-0.420	0.676
试验组	32	45±16	59±12	-3.821	0.000	13±6	20±6	-4.440	0.000	42±17	57±21	-3.066	0.003
t值		0.253	-2.159			0.302	-2.233			0.229	-2.348
P值		0.801	0.035			0.764	0.029			0.819	0.022
组别	例数	转变维度		t值	P值	总分		t值	P值
组别	例数	干预前	干预后	t值	P值	干预前	干预后	t值	P值
对照组	32	41±19	42±14	-0.302	0.764	144±31	155±29	-1.502	0.138
试验组	32	41±18	54±16	-3.104	0.003	141±33	189±32	-5.879	0.000
t值	-	-0.014	-3.215			0.288	-4.435
P值	-	0.989	0.002			0.774	0.000

组别	例数	扩大维度		t值	P值	服从维度		t值	P值	控制维度		t值	P值
组别	例数	干预前	干预后	t值	P值	干预前	干预后	t值	P值	干预前	干预后	t值	P值
对照组	32	46±13	51±15	-1.532	0.131	13±6	16±6	-2.014	0.051	43±19	45±19	-0.420	0.676
试验组	32	45±16	59±12	-3.821	0.000	13±6	20±6	-4.440	0.000	42±17	57±21	-3.066	0.003
t值		0.253	-2.159			0.302	-2.233			0.229	-2.348
P值		0.801	0.035			0.764	0.029			0.819	0.022
组别	例数	转变维度		t值	P值	总分		t值	P值
组别	例数	干预前	干预后	t值	P值	干预前	干预后	t值	P值
对照组	32	41±19	42±14	-0.302	0.764	144±31	155±29	-1.502	0.138
试验组	32	41±18	54±16	-3.104	0.003	141±33	189±32	-5.879	0.000
t值	-	-0.014	-3.215			0.288	-4.435
P值	-	0.989	0.002			0.774	0.000

组别	例数	干预前			干预后			χ²值	P值
组别	例数	低接受度	中接受度	高接受度	低接受度	中接受度	高接受度	χ²值	P值
对照组	32	10（31.2）	22（68.8）	0	8（25）	24（75）	0	0.309	0.578
试验组	32	14（43.8）	17（53.1）	1（3.1）	1（3.1）	25（78.1）	6（18.8）	12.539	0.000
χ²值			1.067			4.655
P值			0.302			0.031

Please choose a citation manager

Content to export