本文選題：不孕不育 + 生活質(zhì)量�。� 參考：《濰坊醫(yī)學(xué)院》2009年碩士論文

【摘要】：目的：研究不孕不育患者的人格特征、應(yīng)對(duì)方式、社會(huì)支持、述情障礙等心理社會(huì)因素與其生活質(zhì)量狀況的關(guān)系,并在此基礎(chǔ)上制定有針對(duì)性的適合于不孕不育群體的心理干預(yù)方案應(yīng)用于臨床,通過臨床實(shí)驗(yàn)驗(yàn)證心理干預(yù)方案對(duì)于改善患者生活質(zhì)量的有效性。 材料與方法：采用自制一般情況調(diào)查表、艾森克人格問卷簡(jiǎn)式量表中國(guó)版(EPQ-RSQ)、多倫多述情障礙量表(TAS)、特質(zhì)應(yīng)對(duì)方式問卷(TCSQ)、社會(huì)支持量表(SSRS)以及健康狀況調(diào)查問卷(SF-36中文版)對(duì)162名不孕不育患者及110名已婚已育健康者進(jìn)行問卷調(diào)查；在數(shù)據(jù)分析的基礎(chǔ)上,制定相應(yīng)的心理干預(yù)方案。隨機(jī)抽取不孕不育�？漆t(yī)院門診患者70人作為干預(yù)組,60人作為非干預(yù)組,對(duì)干預(yù)組進(jìn)行心理干預(yù),非干預(yù)組及干預(yù)組均進(jìn)行常規(guī)臨床治療；三個(gè)月后,對(duì)兩組的生活質(zhì)量狀況及治療狀況進(jìn)行分析。所得數(shù)據(jù)用SPSS16.0作統(tǒng)計(jì)學(xué)處理。方法采用獨(dú)立樣本資料的t檢驗(yàn)及方差分析、單因素相關(guān)分析、卡方檢驗(yàn)、多元逐步回歸分析以及路徑分析。 結(jié)果：(1)不孕不育患者的生活質(zhì)量總分及各因子分均低于已婚已育健康者,不同人口學(xué)資料如性別、教育程度、農(nóng)村與城市不孕不育患者的生活質(zhì)量狀況均存在顯著差異。不同病情、病程的不孕不育患者的生活質(zhì)量狀況也存在顯著差異。(2)不孕不育患者的生活質(zhì)量受心理社會(huì)因素影響明顯,其中,消極應(yīng)對(duì)方式、因子Ⅰ,神經(jīng)質(zhì)人格、支持利用度是影響生活質(zhì)量的主要因素。(3)經(jīng)過心理干預(yù)的不孕不育患者,其整體生活質(zhì)量總分尤其是精神健康總評(píng)顯著提高；通過心理干預(yù),干預(yù)組較非干預(yù)組相比,消極應(yīng)對(duì)、因子Ⅰ、因子Ⅱ得分顯著降低,支持利用度得分顯著升高。(4)通過干預(yù)前后差值的比較及回歸分析的結(jié)果表明,干預(yù)起效果的原因主要?dú)w結(jié)于認(rèn)識(shí)和區(qū)分情緒和軀體感受的能力增強(qiáng)、支持利用度的增加和消極應(yīng)對(duì)的減少。心理干預(yù)方案經(jīng)實(shí)驗(yàn)研究證明是有效的、可行的。 結(jié)論：不孕不育患者生活質(zhì)量的整體狀況較差,患者的生理功能和心理狀態(tài)均受到嚴(yán)重的影響。人格、社會(huì)支持、應(yīng)對(duì)方式、述情障礙是影響不孕不育患者生活質(zhì)量的重要的心理因素。心理干預(yù)對(duì)不孕不育患者生活質(zhì)量的改善效果顯著,對(duì)于干預(yù)組不孕不育患者生活質(zhì)量的改善,干預(yù)起效果的原因主要?dú)w結(jié)于認(rèn)識(shí)和區(qū)分情感和軀體感受的能力增強(qiáng)、支持利用度的增加和消極應(yīng)對(duì)的減少。心理干預(yù)方案經(jīng)實(shí)驗(yàn)研究證明是有效的、可行的。
[Abstract]:Objective: to study the relationship between personality, coping style, social support, alexithymia and the quality of life of infertile patients. On this basis, a targeted psychological intervention program suitable for infertile women was established and applied to clinical practice. The effectiveness of psychological intervention program in improving the quality of life of patients was verified by clinical experiments. Materials and methods: a self-made general information questionnaire was used. Eysenck Personality questionnaire Chinese version (EPQ-RSQ), Toronto alexithymia scale (TAS), trait coping style questionnaire (TCSQ), Social support scale (SSRS) and Health status questionnaire (SF-36 Chinese version) were used in 162 infertile patients and 110 married women. A questionnaire survey was conducted among the healthy persons; On the basis of data analysis, the corresponding psychological intervention program was established. A total of 70 outpatients were randomly selected as intervention group (n = 60) and 60 as non-intervention group (n = 60). Psychological intervention was performed in the intervention group, and routine clinical treatment was performed in both the non-intervention group and the intervention group. The quality of life and treatment of the two groups were analyzed. The data were analyzed by SPSS 16.0. Methods t test and variance analysis, single factor correlation analysis, chi-square test, multivariate stepwise regression analysis and path analysis were used. Results: (1) the total quality of life (QOL) and factor scores of infertile patients were significantly lower than those of married fertile and healthy patients. There were significant differences in different demographic data such as sex, education level and quality of life between rural and urban infertile patients. There were significant differences in the quality of life of infertile patients with different diseases and course of disease. (2) the quality of life of infertile patients was significantly affected by psychological and social factors, among which, negative coping style, factor I, neurotic personality, The utilization of support was the main factor affecting the quality of life. (3) the total score of overall quality of life, especially the general evaluation of mental health, increased significantly in infertile patients with psychological intervention, and the total score of the intervention group was significantly higher than that of the non-intervention group through psychological intervention. The scores of negative coping, factor 鈪，

本文編號(hào)：2051506