Öz yeterlilik ve hemodiyaliz tedavisi: Nitel ve nicel bir yaklaşım

Margorit Rita Krespi BOOTHBY, (Kadir Has Üniversitesi, İstanbul, Türkiye)
Peter SALMON (Liverpool Üniv. Klinik Psikoloji Bl, Liverpool, İngiltere.)
Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi
12 2
Yıl: 2013 Cilt: 24 Sayı: 2 Sayfa Aralığı: 84 - 93 Metin Dili: Türkçe İndeks Tarihi: 29-07-2022

Öz yeterlilik ve hemodiyaliz tedavisi: Nitel ve nicel bir yaklaşım

Öz:
Giriş: Öz yeterliliğin ölçülmesine yönelik teori temelli yaklaşım, hemo- diyaliz hastalarının diyet ve sıvı tüketimi kısıtlamaları konusunda yaşa- dıkları zorlukları açıklamak konusunda yetersiz kalmaktadır. Amaçlar: Bu kısıtlamalar nedeniyle yaşanan zorlukların çeşitliliğinin tespit edilebilmesi, klinisyenlerin hasta görüşmelerinde hastaları yön- lendirebilmeleri için bu zorlukların sayısallaştırılması için nitel ve nicel araştırmaların yönlendirebilmeleri ‘açısından’ bir araya getirilmesi ge- rekmektedir. Bu çalışmada, öz yeterlilik kavramı, diyet ve sıvı tüketimi konusundaki zorluklar üzerine temellendirilmiş ve elde edilen bulgular, karşılaştıkları her zorluğun üstesinden gelebilme kapasiteleri hakkındaki hasta algılarının sayısallaştırılmasını sağlayacak bir anket formunun ha- zırlanması amacıyla kullanılmıştır. Yöntem: Nitel çalışmanın örneklemi 16 hemodiyaliz hastasından olu- şurken, nicel çalışma 156 hemodiyaliz hastasını içermiştir. Bulgular: Nitel bulgular, hastaların diyet ve sıvı tüketimine yönelik kı- sıtlamalar nedeniyle bir dizi özgül zorluk yaşadığını ortaya çıkarmıştır. Bunların arasında pratikte yaşanan kısıtlamalar, başkalarıyla bir araya gelmek, hemodiyalizi diyete uymamanın telafisi olarak görmek, diyet ve sıvı kısıtlamalarından sıkılmak, rahatsızlık, duygusal sıkıntı gibi duy- gusal zorluklar bulunmaktadır. Sıvı kısıtlamalarıyla ilgili karşılaşılan en yaygın zorluk hastanın yemek yerken sıvı tüketme hakkının kalmamış olmasıdır. Diyet kısıtlamalarıyla ilgili yaşanan en yaygın zorluk ise diyet- ten sıkılmak olarak bildirilmiştir. Sonuç: Bulgular, temellendirilmiş öz yeterliliğin bütüncül bir olgu ol- duğunu ancak geniş çapta özgül zorluklar barındırdığını önermektedir. Tespit edilen zorluklar, diyet ve sıvı kısıtlamalarına uyum sağlamayı ge- liştirmek için gerçekleştirilebilecek eğitimsel müdahalelere bir kanıt te- meli sağlamıştır.
Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Psikiyatri

Self-efficacy and hemodialysis treatment: A qualitative and quantitative approach

Öz:
Background: The theoretically driven approach to the measurement of self-efficacy fails to capture the challenges that hemodialysis patients experience in following their dietary and fluid restrictions. Aims: A combination of qualitative and quantitative research is necessary to identify the range of challenges associated with these restrictions and to quantify them if clinicians are to be guided in their consultations with patients. In this study the construct of self-efficacy was grounded on the basis of challenges to dietary and fluid restrictions, and the findings were used to develop a questionnaire to quantify the patients’ perceptions of their ability to overcome each challenge. Materials and Methods: The sample for the qualitative study consisted of 16 hemodialysis patients and the quantitative study included 156 hemodialysis patients. Results: The qualitative findings showed that the patients experienced a range of specific challenges to dietary and fluid restrictions. Among these were practical constraints, being with others, the view of hemodialysis as compensating for dietary non-compliance, and emotional challenges including discomfort, distress, and boredom with dietary and fluid restrictions. The most common challenge to fluid restrictions was eating while not having any fluid allowance left. Boredom with diet was the most common challenge to diet. Hemodialysis treatment was a justification for a significant number of patients to neglect their dietary and fluid restrictions. Conclusion: The findings suggest that grounded self-efficacy is a unitary phenomenon, but that it incorporates a wide spectrum of specific challenges. The challenges identified herein have provided an evidence base for educational interventions to improve compliance with dietary and fluid restrictions.
Anahtar Kelime:

Konular: Psikiyatri
Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • Abramson LY, Seligman MEP, Teasdale JD (1978) Learned helplessness in humans: Critique and reformulation. J Abnormal Psychol 87: 49-74.
  • Ajzen I (1988) Attitudes, Personality, and Behaviour. Chicago, IL, Dorsey Press.
  • Ajzen I (1991) The theory of planned behaviour. Organisational Beh and Human Decision Processes 50: 179-211.
  • Bandura A (1977) Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioural change. Psychol Review 84: 191-215.
  • Bandura A (2002) Social foundations of thought and action. The Health Psychology Reader, cilt 6, D Marks (Ed), Londra. Sage Publications s: 94-106.
  • Blenkinsopp A (2001) From compliance to concor­dance: How are we doing? Int J Pharmacol Prac 9: 65-6.
  • Brady BA, Tucker CM, Alfino PA ve ark. (1997) An investigation of factors associated with fluid adherence among hemodialysis patients: A self-efficacy theory based approach. Annals Behav Med 19: 339-43.
  • Brantley PJ, Mosley TH, Bruce BK ve ark. (1990) Efficacy of behavioral management and patient education on vascular access cleansing compliance in hemodialysis patients. Health Psychol 9: 103-13.
  • Brown J, Fitzpatrick R (1988) Factors influencing compliance with dietary restrictions in dialysis patients. J Psychosomatic Res 32: 191-6.
  • Crabtree BF, Miller WL (1992) A template approach to text analysis: Developing and using codebooks. Doing Qualitative Research. Sage Publications, s.93-107.
  • Cukor D, Peterson RA, Cohen SD ve ark. (2006) Depression in end-stage renal disease hemodialysis patients. Nat Clin Prac Nephrol 2: 678-87.
  • Cummings KM, Becker MH, Kirscht JP ve ark. (1982) Psychosocial factors affecting adherence to medical regimens in a group of hemodialysis patients. Med Care 20: 567-80.
  • Curtin RB, Johnson HK, Schatell D (2004) The peritoneal dialysis experience: Insights from long-term patients. Nephrol Nursing J 31: 615-24.
  • Devins GM, Binik YM, Gorman P ve ark. (1982) Perceived self-efficacy outcome expectancies and negative mood states in ESRD. J Abnormal Psychol 91: 241-4.
  • Eitel P, Friend R, Griffin KW ve ark. (1988) Cognitive control and consistency in compliance. Psychol Health 13: 953-73.
  • Everett KD, Sletten C, Carmack C ve ark. (1993) Predicting noncompliance to fluid restrictions in hemodialysis patients. Dialysis & Transplantation 10: 614-20.
  • Fisher EB, Delamater AM, Bertelson AM ve ark. (1992) Psychological factors in diabetes and its treatment. J Consult Clin Psychol 50: 993-1003.
  • Glaser BG, Strauss AL (1967) The constant comparative method of qualitative analysis. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research, 1. Baskı. New York, Aldine, s.72-95.
  • Goodall TA, Halford WK (1991) Self-management of diabetes mellitus: A critical review. Health Psychol 10: 1-8.
  • Green LW, Kreuter MW (1990) Health promotion as a public health strategy for the 1990s. Annual Review of Public Health, cilt 11, L Brewslow, JE Fielding, LB Lave (Ed), Palo Alto, CA. Annual Reviews Inc., s.319-34.
  • Gregory DM, Way CY, Hutchinson TA ve ark. (1998) Patients’ perceptions of their experiences with ESRD and haemodialysis treatment. Qual Health Res 8: 764-83.
  • Henwood KL, Pidgeon NF (1992) Qualitative research and psychological theorizing. Br J Psychol 83: 97-111.
  • Kelley HH (1967) Attribution theory in social psychology. Nebraska Symposium on Motivation, D Levine (Ed), Lincoln, NB. University of Nebraska Press, s.192-238.
  • Kimmel PL (2001) Psychosocial factors in dialysis patients. Kidney International 59: 1599-613.
  • Kimmel PL (2002) Depression in patients with chronic renal disease: What we know and what we need to know. Psychosomatic Res 53: 951-6.
  • Kimmel PL, Peterson RA (2005) Depression in end-stage renal disease patients treated with haemodialysis: Tools, correlates, outcomes and needs. Seminars in Dialysis 18: 91-7.
  • Krespi Boothby MR, Salmon P (2010) The grounding of the construct of self-efficacy in type 2 diabetic patients’ own thinking. Turkish Clinics J Endocrinology 5: 39-48.
  • Krespi MR, Bone M, Ahmad R ve ark. (2008) Haemodialysis patients’ evaluation of their lives. Turkish J Psychiatry 19: 365-72.
  • Krespi R, Bone M, Ahmad R ve ark. (2004) Haemodialysis patients beliefs about renal failure and its treatment. Pat Educ Counsel 53: 189-96.
  • Lambert ZV, Wildt AR, Durand RM (1991) Approximating confidence intervals for factor loadings. Multivariate Behav Res 26: 421-34.
  • Leggat JE, Orzol SM, Hulbert-Shearon TE ve ark. (1998) Noncompliance in hemodialysis: Predictors and survival analysis. Am J Kidney Diseases 32: 139-45.
  • Levenson H (1973) Multidimensional locus of control in psychiatric patients. J Consulting Clinical Psychol 41: 397-404.
  • Loghman-Adham M (2003) Medication noncompliance in patients with chronic disease: Issues in dialysis and renal transplantation. Am J Managed Care 9: 155-71.
  • Maguire P (2002) Key communication skills and how to acquire them. Brit Med J 325: 697.
  • Miller WL, Crabtree BF (1992) Primary care research: A multimethod typology and qualitative road map. Doing Qualitative Research, BF Crabtree, WL Miller (Ed). Sage Publications, s.3-28.
  • Ng TP, Niti M, Tan WC ve ark. (2007) Depressive symptoms and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease: Effect on mortality, hospital readmission, symptom burden, functional status and quality of life. Archives Inter Med 167: 60-7.
  • Peerbhoy D, Hall GM, Parker C ve ark. (1998) Patients’reactions to attempts to increase passive or active coping with surgery. Social Science Med 47: 595-601.
  • Poll IB, Kaplan De Nour A (1980) Locus of control and adjustment to chronic haemodialysis. Psychol Med 10: 153-7.
  • Richard CJ (2006) Self-care management in adults undergoing hemodialysis. Nephrol Nursing J 33: 387-96.
  • Rosenbaum M, Ben-Ari Smira K (1986) Cognitive and personality factors in the delay of gratification of hemodialysis patients. J Personality Social Psychol 51: 357-64.
  • Rotter JB (1954) Social Learning and Clinical Psychology. Englewood Cliffs, New Jersey, Prentice-Hall.
  • Rotter JB (1966) Generalised expectancies for internal versus external control of reinforcement. Psychological Monographs: General and Applied, 80, Whole Number 1.
  • Sacco WP, Yanover T (2006) Diabetes and depression: The role of social support and medical symptoms. J Behav Med 29: 523-31.
  • Schneider MS, Friend R, Whitaker P ve ark. (1991) Fluid noncompliance and symptomatology in end-stage renal disease: Cognitive and emotional variables. Health Psychol 10: 209-15.
  • Segal JZ (2007) Compliance to Concordance: A critical view. J Med Humanities 28: 81-96.
  • Seligman MEP (1975) Helplessness: On Depression, Development and Health. San Francisco, W.H. Freeman.
  • Stroebe W, Stroebe MS (1995) Social Psychology and Health. UK, Open University Press.
  • Talbot F, Nouwen A, Gingras J ve ark. (1997) The assessment of diabetes-related cognitive and social factors: The multidimensional diabetes questionnaire. J Behav Med 20: 291-312.
  • Tsay SL (2003) Self-efficacy training for patients with end-stage renal disease. J Advanced Nursing 43: 370-5.
  • Turnquist DC, Harvey JH, Anderson BL (1988) Attributions and adjustment to life threatening disease. Br J Clinical Psychol 27: 55-65.
  • Wallston KA, Wallston BS, DeVellis R (1978) Development of the Multidimensional Health Locus of Control Scales. Health Educ Monographs 6: 160-70.
  • Witenberg SH, Blanchard EB, Suls J ve ark. (1983) Perceptions of control and causality as predictors of compliance and coping in haemodialysis. Basic Applied Soc Psychol 4: 319-36.
  • Wingard RL, Pupim LB, Krishnan M ve ark. (2007) Early intervention improves mortality and hospitalization rates in incident hemodialysis patients: RightStart Program. Clin J Am Society Nephrol 2: 1170–5.
  • Wright SJ, Kirby A (1999) Deconstructing conceptualisations of adjustment to chronic illness: A proposed integrative framework. J Health Psychol 4: 259-74.
  • Zrinyi M, Juhasz M, Balla J ve ark. (2003) Dietary self-efficacy: Determinant of compliance behaviours and biochemical outcomes in haemodialysis patients. Nephrol Dial Transplant 18: 1869-73.
APA BOOTHBY M, SALMON P (2013). Öz yeterlilik ve hemodiyaliz tedavisi: Nitel ve nicel bir yaklaşım. , 84 - 93.
Chicago BOOTHBY Margorit Rita Krespi,SALMON Peter Öz yeterlilik ve hemodiyaliz tedavisi: Nitel ve nicel bir yaklaşım. (2013): 84 - 93.
MLA BOOTHBY Margorit Rita Krespi,SALMON Peter Öz yeterlilik ve hemodiyaliz tedavisi: Nitel ve nicel bir yaklaşım. , 2013, ss.84 - 93.
AMA BOOTHBY M,SALMON P Öz yeterlilik ve hemodiyaliz tedavisi: Nitel ve nicel bir yaklaşım. . 2013; 84 - 93.
Vancouver BOOTHBY M,SALMON P Öz yeterlilik ve hemodiyaliz tedavisi: Nitel ve nicel bir yaklaşım. . 2013; 84 - 93.
IEEE BOOTHBY M,SALMON P "Öz yeterlilik ve hemodiyaliz tedavisi: Nitel ve nicel bir yaklaşım." , ss.84 - 93, 2013.
ISNAD BOOTHBY, Margorit Rita Krespi - SALMON, Peter. "Öz yeterlilik ve hemodiyaliz tedavisi: Nitel ve nicel bir yaklaşım". (2013), 84-93.
APA BOOTHBY M, SALMON P (2013). Öz yeterlilik ve hemodiyaliz tedavisi: Nitel ve nicel bir yaklaşım. Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi, 24(2), 84 - 93.
Chicago BOOTHBY Margorit Rita Krespi,SALMON Peter Öz yeterlilik ve hemodiyaliz tedavisi: Nitel ve nicel bir yaklaşım. Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi 24, no.2 (2013): 84 - 93.
MLA BOOTHBY Margorit Rita Krespi,SALMON Peter Öz yeterlilik ve hemodiyaliz tedavisi: Nitel ve nicel bir yaklaşım. Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi, vol.24, no.2, 2013, ss.84 - 93.
AMA BOOTHBY M,SALMON P Öz yeterlilik ve hemodiyaliz tedavisi: Nitel ve nicel bir yaklaşım. Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi. 2013; 24(2): 84 - 93.
Vancouver BOOTHBY M,SALMON P Öz yeterlilik ve hemodiyaliz tedavisi: Nitel ve nicel bir yaklaşım. Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi. 2013; 24(2): 84 - 93.
IEEE BOOTHBY M,SALMON P "Öz yeterlilik ve hemodiyaliz tedavisi: Nitel ve nicel bir yaklaşım." Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi, 24, ss.84 - 93, 2013.
ISNAD BOOTHBY, Margorit Rita Krespi - SALMON, Peter. "Öz yeterlilik ve hemodiyaliz tedavisi: Nitel ve nicel bir yaklaşım". Türk Psikiyatri Dergisi 24/2 (2013), 84-93.
Sayfa Oluşturulma Tarihi
22-04-2024 19:29

İLETİŞİM

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM TR Dizin

Yüzüncüyıl, İşçi Blokları Mahallesi

Muhsin Yazıcıoğlu Caddesi No:51/C

06530 Çankaya / ANKARA +90 (312) 298 92 00

trdizin@tubitak.gov.tr

TÜBİTAK ULAKBİM Ulusal Akademik Ağ ve Bilgi Merkezi Cahit Arf Bilgi Merkezi © Tüm Hakları Saklıdır. Gizlilik Politikası Kullanım Şartları