以质量求发展，以服务铸品牌

护理学报 ›› 2019, Vol. 26 ›› Issue (2): 45-50.doi: 10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2019.02.045

• 调查研究 • 上一篇    下一篇

331例首次经体外受精-胚胎移植患者配偶心理困扰现状及影响因素分析

康晓菲1a, 韩新美1b, 李国鹏1a, 房鹛2   

  1. 1.山东大学附属生殖医院 a.护理部;b.IVF-ET室,山东 济南 250000;
    2.山东大学附属省立医院生殖医学中心 护理部,山东 济南 250000
  • 收稿日期:2018-11-09 出版日期:2019-01-25 发布日期:2020-07-16
  • 通讯作者: 房 鹛（1976-）,女,山东潍坊人,本科学历,副主任护师。
  • 作者简介:康晓菲（1992-）,女,河北石家庄人,硕士研究生,护士。

Psychological Distress of 331 Patient's Spouses Firstly with in vitro Fertilization and Embryo Transfer and Its Influence Factors

KANG Xiao-fei1a, HAN Xin-mei1b, LI Guo-peng1a, FANG Mei2   

  1. 1a. Dept. Nursing Administration; 1b. Dept. of IVF-ET, Reproductive Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University,Jinan 250000, China;
    2. Dept. of Nursing Administration, Reproductive Medicine Center, Provincial Hospital Affiliated to Shandong University, Jinan 250000, China
  • Received:2018-11-09 Online:2019-01-25 Published:2020-07-16

PDF (PC)

338

赞

摘要： 目的 探讨首次经体外受精-胚胎移植患者配偶的心理困扰状况,分析其影响因素。方法 采用方便抽样方法,选取2017年4—12月在济南市3家医院首次采用体外受精-胚胎移植患者配偶为研究对象。采用一般资料调查表、简易心理状况调查表、心理弹性量表、简易应对方式量表、领悟社会支持量表及神经质人格分量表对331例首次体外受精-胚胎移植患者配偶进行调查,采用等级Logistic回归分析对其心理困扰的影响因素。结果 331例首次体外受精-胚胎移植患者配偶,其心理困扰得分为（19.72±5.44）分,其中74.0%的男性具有不同程度的心理困扰。等级Logistic回归结果显示,治疗时长（OR=1.150,95%CI: 0.051~0.228）、消极应对方式（OR=1.107,95%CI: 0.046~0.157）、神经质人格（OR=1.108,95%CI: 0.055~0.151）是心理困扰的危险因素;心理弹性（OR=0.941,95%CI: -0.101~-0.021）是心理困扰的保护因素。结论 首次经体外受精-胚胎移植患者配偶普遍存在心理困扰,治疗时长、消极应对方式、神经质人格是心理困扰的危险因素;心理弹性是心理困扰的保护因素。建议医护人员对治疗时间长、有神经质倾向的首次经体外受精-胚胎移植患者配偶应给予更多的关注,同时应鼓励该人群学会合理宣泄自己的情绪,从而减少消极应对方式;此外,寻找切实有效方式来提高该人群的心理弹性水平。

关键词: 体外受精-胚胎移植, 首次, 配偶, 心理困扰, 心理弹性, 应对方式, 社会支持, 神经质人格

Abstract: Objective To explore psychological distress of patient's spouses treated firstly by in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer(IVF-ET) and analyze its influence factors. Methods A convenience sampling study was conducted. Patient's spouses treated firstly by IVF-ET admitted to three hospitals in Jinan from April 2017 to December 2017 were enrolled. The informntion were collected from subjects (n=331) by using general information questionnaire, Mental Health Status Scale, Connor-Davidson Resilience Scale, Simplified Coping Style Questionnaire, Perceived Social Support Scale and Subscale of Neurotic Personality. Ordinal logistic regression was performed to analyze statistics data. Results The total score of psychological distress was 19.72±5.44, and the prevalence of psychological distress was 74.0%. Ordinal logistic regression indicated treatment time (OR=1.150, 95%CI: 0.051~0.228), negative coping style (OR=1.107, 95%CI: 0.046~0.157) and neuroticism (OR=1.108, 95%CI: 0.055~0.151) were risk factors of psychological distress; while resilience (OR=0.941, 95%CI:-0.101~-0.021) was the protective factor. Conclusion The psychological distress status is relatively general among patient's spouses treated firstly by IVF-ET. The treatment time, negative coping style and neuroticism were risk factors of psychological distress; while resilience was the protective factor. More attention should be paid to patient's spouses treated firstly by IVF-ET who had more treatment time or higher scores of neuroticism. Encourage patient's spouses to express their emotions and reduce negative coping styles. Relevant intervention courses could be carried out to improve the psychological distress, relevant intervention courses could be carried out to improve the psychological distress.

Key words: in vitro fertilization and embryo transfer, firstly, spouse, psychological distress, resilience, coping style, social support, neuroticism

中图分类号: 

  • R471
[1] 田晓红,孙瑶瑶,邹桂元,等.话务员心理困扰的有序 Logistic 回归分析[J].中国心理卫生杂志, 2015, 29(10):790-794. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1000-6729.2015.10.015.
[2] Zhou Z, Zheng D, Wu H, et aL. EpidemioLogy of InfertiLity in China: A Population-based Study[J]. BJOG, 2018, 125(4):432-441. DOI:10.1111/1471-0528.14966.
[3] Demyttenaere K, Nijs P, Evers-Kiebooms G, et aL. Coping, Ineffectiveness of Coping and the PsychoendocrinoLogicaL Stress Responses During In-Vitro FertiLization[J]. J Psychosom Res, 1991, 35(2/3):231-243.
[4] 康晓菲,方跃艳,赵迪,等. 不孕女性患者知觉压力在正念水平与心理困扰间的中介作用[J].山东大学学报(医学版),2017, 55(9):105-109.DOI:10.6040/j.issn.1671-7554.0.2017.228.
[5] 张琼,陈丹,蒋玲,等. 接受体外受精-胚胎移植治疗女患者个人社会心理因素对治疗结局的影响[J].护理学报, 2016, 23(20):1-4. DOI:10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2016.20.001.
[6] 孙洪梅,钱卫平,刘波澜,等. 118例体外受精-胚胎移植助孕患者心理症状分析[J].护理学报, 2015, 22(14):70-72. DOI:10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2015.14.070.
[7] 张琼,陈丹,蒋俐萍,等. 行体外受精-胚胎移植女性患者焦虑抑郁现状及影响因素分析[J].护理学报, 2017, 24(14):43-47. DOI:10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2017.14.043.
[8] KessLer R C, Andrews G, CoLpe L J, et aL. Short Screening Scales to Monitor Population Prevalences and Trends in Non-specific Psychological Distress[J]. Psychol Med, 2002, 32(6):959-976. DOI:10.1017/S0033291702006074.
[9] 徐凌忠,王建新,孙辉,等. Kessler 10在我国的首次应用研究及其重要意义[J].卫生软科学, 2005, 19(6):410-412. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1003-2800.2005.06.013.
[10] 周成超,楚洁,王婷,等.简易心理状况评定量表kessler10中文版的信度和效度评价[J]. 中国临床心理学杂志, 2008, 16(6):627-629. DOI:10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2008.06.026.
[11] 孔令华. 不孕不育夫妇情绪困扰及其影响因素的二元交互模型构建[D]. 济南:山东大学, 2017.
[12] Campbell-sills L, Stein M B. Psychometric Analysis and Refinement of the Connor-davidson Resilience Scale (CD-RISC): Validation of a 10-Item Measure of Resilience[J].J Trauma Stress, 2010, 20(6):1019-1028. DOI:10.1002/jts.20271.
[13] Duan W, Guo P, Gan P.Relationships among Trait Resilience, Virtues, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, and Post-Traumatic Growth[J].PLoS One,2015,10(5):e0125707. DOI:10.1371/journaL.pone.0125707. eCoLLection 2015.
[14] Yu X and Zhang J. Factor Analysis and Psychometric Evaluation of the Connor-davidson Resiliencescale (CD-RISC) with Chinese People[J]. Soc Behav Personal, 2007, 35(1):19-30. DOI:10.2224/sbp.2007.35.1.19.
[15] Wang L, Shi Z, Zhang Y, et al.Psychometric Properties of the 10-Item Connor-davidson Resilience Scale in Chinese Earthquake Victims[J]. Psychiatry Clin Neurosci, 2010, 64(5):499-504. DOI:10.1111/j.1440-1819.2010.02130.x.
[16] Lazarus R S, Delongis A, Folkman S, et al.Stress and Adaptational Outcomes. The Problem of Confounded Measures[J].Am PsychoL, 1985, 40(7):770-785.
[17] 解亚宁. 简易应对方式量表信度和效度的初步研究[J].中国临床心理学杂志,1998, 6(2):114-115. DOI:10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.1998.02.018.
[18] Zimet G D, Dahlem N W, Zimet S G, et aL. The MultidimensionaL Scale of Perceived Social Support[J]. J Pers Assess,1988(52):30-41.DOI:10.1207/s15327752jpa5201_2.[19] Chou K L. Assessing Chinese Adolescents' Social Support: The MultidimensionaL Scale of Perceived Social Support[J]. Pers Indiv Differ,2000,28(2):299-307.DOI10.1016/S0191-8869(99)00098-7.
[20] John O P, Srivastava S.The Big Five Trait Taxonomy: History, Measurement,Theoretical Perspectives [EB/OL]. (2006-10-30)[2018-12-12]. https://www.ocf.berkeley.edu/~johnlab/pdfs/john&srivastava,1999.pdf.
[21] Carciofo R, Yang J, Song N, et al.Psychometric Evaluation of Chinese-language 44-Item and 10-Item Big Five Personality Inventories, Including Correlations with Chronotype, Mindfulness and Mind Wandering[J]. PLoS One, 2016,11(2):e0149963. DOI:10.1371/journaL.pone.0149963. eCoLLection 2016.
[22] 刘双金,胡义秋,孙焕良. 生活事件对大学生抑郁的影响:神经质与应对方式的链式中介作用[J]. 中国临床心理学杂志, 2018,26(6):1230-1233. DOI:10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2018.06.040.
[23] 周飞京,董悦芝. 初诊不孕不育夫妇中男性的性压力现况调查[J].中华护理杂志, 2016, 51(4):499-501. DOI:10.3761/j.issn.0254-1796.2016.04.024.
[24] Kazandi M, Gunday O, Mermer T K, et aL. The Status of Depression and Anxiety in Infertile Turkish Couples[J]. Iran J Reprod Med, 2011, 9(2):99-104.
[25] AL-Asadi, J N, Hussein Z B. Depression among Infertile Women in Basrah, Iraq: Prevalence and Risk Factors[J]. J Chin Med Assoc, 2015, 78(11):673-677.DOI:10.1016/j.jcma.2015.07.009.
[26] 余淑嫒,翟惠敏. 综合医院低年资护士心理健康与应对方式及社会支持的相关性研究[J].护理学报, 2013, 20(5B): 1-4. DOI:10.16460/j.issn1008-9969.2013.10.014.
[27] Matzka M, Mayer H, Köck-Hódi S, et al.Relationship between Resilience, PsychologicaL Distress and PhysicaL Activity in Cancer Patients: A Cross-sectionaL Observation Study[J]. PLoS One, 2016, 11(4):e0154496. DOI:10.1371/journaL.pone.0154496. eCoLLection 2016.
[28] Luthar S S, CurLee A, Tye SJ, et al. Fostering Resilience among Mothers under Stress:“Authentic Connections Groups” for Medical Professionals[J]. Womens Health Issues, 2017, 27(3):382-390. DOI:10.1016/j.whi.2017.02.007.
[29] Foureur M, BesLey K, Burton G, et aL. Enhancing the Resilience of Nurses and Midwives: Pilot of a Mindfulness-based Program for Increased Health, Sense of Coherence and Decreased Depression, Anxiety and Stress[J]. Contemp Nurse, 2013, 45(1):114-125. DOI:10.5172/conu.2013.45.1.114.
[30] 席畅,凌宇,钟明天,等. 神经质在大学生应激与抑郁关系中的调节作用[J].中国临床心理学杂志, 2016, 24(4):636-639. DOI:10.16128/j.cnki.1005-3611.2016.04.013.
[1] 马新莉, 胡志琴. 182例晚期癌症患者主要照顾者预感性悲伤现状及影响因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2020, 27(5): 42-46.
[2] 张丹妮, 朱慧, 谢传艺, 陈肖敏. 乳腺癌患者配偶照顾体验质性研究的Meta整合[J]. 护理学报, 2020, 27(4): 32-36.
[3] 朱一凡, 陈芷谦, 郭巧红, 苏娅丽. 196例乳腺癌化疗患者尊严现状及影响因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2020, 27(12): 33-37.
[4] 伊静, 董建俐, 程洋, 沙丽艳. 200例肝癌首次经动脉化疗栓塞术后患者心理痛苦现状及影响因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2020, 27(11): 61-65.
[5] 龙吉芳, 黄旭倩, 周娜, 莫晗, 刘勇. 308例癌症中年患者希望水平现状及影响因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2019, 26(8): 37-40.
[6] 叶子文, 甄莉, 朱木兰, 胡婷, 王惠珍. 220例预防性肠造口患者病耻感现状及影响因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2019, 26(3): 40-45.
[7] 解文君, 张帅, 刘毅, 张会娟, 刘贵英, 王蓓, 刘洁, 刘玉秋, 管伟. 领悟社会支持及应对方式在恶性血液病行造血干细胞移植患者心理弹性与创伤后成长间的中介效应[J]. 护理学报, 2019, 26(3): 73-78.
[8] 王谊, 陈亚梅. 炎症性肠病患者自我效能现状及影响因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2019, 26(2): 55-60.
[9] 鲍祎敏, 成华艳, 欧阳旭平, 胡素文, 王敏, 陈丹. 二胎产妇配偶产后抑郁现状及影响因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2019, 26(17): 73-76.
[10] 秦如梦, 陆彩云, 周利华, 黄秀华, 钟起. 妇科癌症患者创伤后成长现状及其影响因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2019, 26(15): 9-13.
[11] 李佳倩, 朱冰洁, 李梦媛, 阎玲. 晚期癌症患者配偶恐惧疾病进展的现状及影响因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2019, 26(14): 5-9.
[12] 盛晓娟, 陈文月, 傅巧美. Groningen骨科社会支持量表汉化及其应用于髋膝关节置换术后患者中的信效度研究[J]. 护理学报, 2019, 26(14): 51-54.
[13] 张敏,王清,李红丽. 急性脑卒中患者心理弹性现况及其影响因素研究[J]. 护理学报, 2018, 25(9): 75-78.
[14] 黎慧,印怡臻,王安妮,张静平. 职业倦怠在护士应对方式与共情能力间的中介作用分析[J]. 护理学报, 2018, 25(8): 5-8.
[15] 张文皓,吴振彪,王晶,高丽,刘志琛,曹宝花. 396例系统性红斑狼疮患者心理弹性及影响因素分析[J]. 护理学报, 2018, 25(7): 36-41.
Viewed
Full text


Abstract

Cited
  Shared   
No Suggested Reading articles found!