4 research outputs found
(An) empirical study on stressor experienced by nursing students during clinical training : with special reference to junior college stu
κ°νΈνκ΅μ‘/μμ¬[νκΈ]
λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬λ μμμ€μ΅μ νμ₯μμ κ°νΈνμμ΄ κ²½ννλ μ€νΈλ μ€μμΈμ νμ
νκΈ° μν΄ μλλ κ²μ΄λ€.
μμμ€μ΅μ μ§μμ΄λ κ°λ
μ μ΄ν΄μλ§ κ·ΈμΉμ§ μκ³ μ€μ μΈκ° κ°νΈμ μ μ©ν μ μλ κ³Όμ κ³Ό λ°©λ²μ νλ ¨μμΌ νμλ₯Ό λνλ νμλ€μ μκ°κ³Ό νλλ₯Ό λ°λ‘ κ°λλ‘ μ΄λμ΄μ£Όλ κ³Όμ μ΄λ€. μ€νΈλ μ€μ κ°λ
μ μΌμμνμ μμ΄μ μΈκ°μ μ΄ν΄νλλ° νμν κ²μ΄μ§λ§ μμμ€μ΅μ κ°νΈνμμ΄ κ²½ννκ²λλ μκ·Ήμ μμ μ λΉν΄μΌ λ°λμ§ ν κ²μ΄λ€. κ·Έλ¬λ―λ‘ μμμ€μ΅μ κ°νΈνμμ΄ κ²½ννλ μ€νΈλ μ€μμΈμ ꡬ체μ μΌλ‘ νμ
νμ¬ λ°λμ§ν μμμ€μ΅μ μ§λ λ° κ°μ μ λμμ΄ λκ³ κ°νΈνμλ€μ΄ μ’λ ν¨κ³Όμ μΌλ‘ κΈ°μ΄μλ£λ₯Ό μ 곡νκΈ° μνμ¬ λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬κ° μλλμλ€.
λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬μ ꡬ체μ λͺ©μ μ λ€μκ³Ό κ°λ€.
1. μμμ€μ΅μ κ°νΈνμμ΄ κ²½ννλ μ€νΈλ μ€μμΈμ νμ
νλ€.
2. μμμ€μ΅μ κ°νΈνμμ΄ κ²½ννλ μ€νΈλ μ€μμΈμ μμλ³ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό νμ
νλ€.
3. μμμ€μ΅μ κ°νΈνμμ΄ κ²½ννλ μνλΆμμ μ λλ₯Ό νμ
νλ€.
4. μμμ€μ΅μ κ°νΈνμμ΄ κ²½ννλ μ€νΈλ μ€μμΈμ μμκ³Ό μνλΆμμ λμμ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό νμ
νλ€.
5. μ€νΈλ μ€μμΈκ³Ό μΌλ°μ νΉμ±κ³Όμ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό νμ
νλ€.
μ°κ΅¬λμμ D,Rμ λ¬Έλνμ 2, 3νλ
μ΄ 133λͺ
μ λμμΌλ‘ νμλ€.
μ°κ΅¬λꡬλ‘λ Spiebbergerμ μνλΆμμ²λμ λ¬Ένκ³ μ°° λ° κ°λ°©μ μ§λ¬Έμ ν΅ν΄ ꡬμ±λ μ€νΈλ μ€μμΈμ²λλ₯Ό μ΄μ©νμ¬ μμ±λ ꡬ쑰νλ μ§λ¬Έμ§λ₯Ό μ¬μ©νμλ€.
μλ£μμ§κΈ°κ°μ 1984λ
4μ 20μΌλΆν° 4μ 30μΌκΉμ§ 10μΌκ° μ΄μμΌλ©°, μλ£μμ§λ°©λ²μ λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬μκ° μ§μ 6κ°μ μ€μ΅λ³μμ λ°©λ¬Ένμ¬ μ°κ΅¬μ λͺ©μ μ μ€λͺ
νκ³ λμλ₯Ό μ»μ ν κ·Έ μ리μμ μ§λ¬Έμ§λ₯Ό λ°°λΆν ν νμνμλ€.
μμ§λ μλ£μ λΆμμ μ½λ©μΉ΄μλμ λΆνΈν ν νμ μ μ°ν΅κ³μ²λ¦¬νμλλ°, λ°±λΆμ¨, νκ· κ³Ό νμ€μ€μ°¨, x**2 - test, Pearson Correlation Coefficient, t-test, ANOVAλ₯Ό μ¬μ©νμ¬ λΆμνμλ€.
μ°κ΅¬κ²°κ³Όλ₯Ό μμ½νλ©΄ λ€μκ³Ό κ°λ€.
1. λμμμ κ°νΈνμ 곡λ§μ‘±λλ "λ§μ‘±νλ€"κ° 42.9%λ‘ λνλ¬κ³ μμμ€μ΅λ§μ‘±λλ 12.8%λ‘ λνλ¬λ€. μΌλ°μ νΉμ±κ°μ κ΄κ³μμλ κ°νΈνμ 곡λ§μ‘±λμ μμμ€μ΅λ§μ‘±λμλ μ μν μ°¨μ΄κ° μλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€(x**2 = 25.123, d.f=4, p<0.01).
2. μμμ€μ΅μ κ°νΈνμμ΄ κ²½ννλ μ€νΈλ μ€μμΈμ κ° μμλ³λ‘ 보면 "κ°νΈνλ"μ΄ νκ· 3.291λ‘ κ°μ₯ ν¬κ² μ€νΈλ μ€λ₯Ό κ²½ννλ μ€νΈλ μ€μμΈμ μμμ΄κ³ , "λμΈκ΄κ³"λ 2.629λ‘ κ°μ₯ μ κ² μ€νΈλ μ€λ₯Ό κ²½ννλ μ€νΈλ μ€μμΈμ μμμΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€.
κ° μμμμ ν¬ν¨λλ μ€νΈλ μ€μμΈμ λν΄ μ΄ν΄λ³΄λ©΄ νκ²½μμλ "κ²½νμ΄ μλ μλ‘μ΄ μν©μΌλ‘ μΈνμ¬"κ° 3.647λ‘ κ°μ₯ ν¬κ² μ€νΈλ μ€λ₯Ό κ²½ννλ μμΈμΌλ‘λνλ¬κ³ , "μ€μ΅μ λ³μμ λν Orientationμ μ λμ μ°¨μ΄κ° μκΈ° λλ¬Έμ"λ 2.872λ‘ κ°μ₯ μ κ² μ€νΈλ μ€λ₯Ό κ²½ννλ μμΈμΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. λμΈκ΄κ³μμ μ΄ν΄λ³΄λ©΄ "μκ°νΈμκ³Όμ κ΄κ³μ μμ΄μ"κ° 3.114λ‘ κ°μ₯ ν¬κ² μ€νΈλ μ€λ₯Ό κ²½ννλ μμΈμΌλ‘ λνλ¬κ³ , "νμ보νΈμμμ κ΄κ³μ μμ΄μ"κ° 2.271λ‘ κ°μ₯ μ κ² μ€νΈλ μ€λ₯Ό κ²½ννλ μμΈμΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. μν μμ 보면 "λ
μμ μΈ κ°νΈμν μ κ²°νμΌλ‘ μΈνμ¬"κ° 3.511λ‘ κ°μ₯ ν¬κ² μ€νΈλ μ€λ₯Ό κ²½ννλ μμΈμΌλ‘ λνλ¬κ³ , "μ€μ΅μ€μ μ€μλλ μ§λ΄νλ‘ μΈνμ¬"κ° 2.346μΌλ‘ κ°μ₯ μ κ² μ€νΈλ μ€λ₯Ό κ²½ννλ μμΈμΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. κ°νΈμ μ΄μκ³Ό κ°μΉμμ 보면 "νκ΅μ€μ΅κ³Ό λ³μμ€μ΅κ³Όμ μ°¨μ΄μ μμ΄μ"κ° 3.662λ‘ κ°μ₯ ν¬κ² μ€νΈλ μ€λ₯Ό κ²½ννλ μμΈμΌλ‘ λνλ¬κ³ , "μμ μ μ±κ²©μΌλ‘ μ μνκΈ° μ΄λ ΅κΈ° λλ¬Έμ"κ° 2.549λ‘ κ°μ₯ μ κ² μ€νΈλ μ€λ₯Ό κ²½ννλ μμΈμΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€. κ°νΈνλμμ 보면 "μ€μ΅μ μ£Όλ‘ λ¨μνκ³ κΈ°λ₯μ μΈ μΌλ§ λ°λ³΅λλ κ²½μ°"κ° 4.023μΌλ‘ κ°μ₯ ν¬κ² μ€νΈλ μ€λ₯Ό κ²½ννλ μμΈμΌλ‘ λνλ¬κ³ , "νλμ 볡μ₯μ λΆνΈμ±μΌλ‘ μΈνμ¬"κ° 2.316μΌλ‘ κ°μ₯ μ κ² μ€νΈλ μ€λ₯Ό κ²½ννλ μμΈμΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€.
3. μμμ€μ΅μ κ°νΈνμμ΄ κ²½ννλ μ€νΈλ μ€μμΈμ μμκ°μ κ΄κ³λ νκ²½, λμΈκ΄κ³, μν , κ°νΈμ μ΄μκ³Ό κ°μΉ, κ°νΈνλμ λͺ¨λ μμκ°μ μκ΄κ΄κ³κ° λμ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€(p<0.01).
4. μμμ€μ΅μ κ°νΈνμμ΄ κ²½ννλ μνλΆμμ μ λλ 보ν΅μ λμ λΆμμΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€(νκ· 49.008).
5. μνλΆμκ³Ό μ€νΈλ μ€μμΈμ μμκ³Όμ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό 보면 μνλΆμμ νκ²½, λμΈκ΄κ³, μν , κ°νΈμ μ΄μκ³Ό κ°μΉ, κ°νΈνλμ λͺ¨λ μμκ³Ό μκ΄κ΄κ³κ° μλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€.
6. μ€νΈλ μ€μμΈμ μμκ³Ό μΌλ°μ νΉμ±κ³Όμ κ΄κ³λ₯Ό 보면 "νκ²½"κ³Ό μ 체μ 건κ°μν λ° κ°νΈνμ 곡λ§μ‘±λ, "κ°νΈμ μ΄μκ³Ό κ°μΉ"μ μμμ€μ΅λ§μ‘±λλ μ μν μ°¨μ΄κ° μλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€(p<0.01). κ·Έλ¦¬κ³ "νκ²½", "λμΈκ΄κ³", "κ°νΈνλ"κ³Ό μμμ€μ΅λ§μ‘±λ, "μν "κ³Ό μ’
κ΅, "κ°νΈμ μ΄μκ³Ό κ°μΉ"μ κ°νΈνμ 곡λ§μ‘±λμλ μ μν μ°¨μ΄κ° μλ κ²μΌλ‘ λνλ¬λ€(p<0.05).
[μλ¬Έ]
This study was done in order to better understand he stressors which nursing students experience during clinical training.
Clinical training is not confined to understanding the facts and concepts of nursing care. Rather, it is more than that, in that it is the course that leads students to develop right thinking and attitudes. Also, clinical training provides students with opportunity to develop the process and methods which specifically apply to nursing of the total human being. The concept of stress provides us with the key which is necessary to understand human beings in daily life. Some level of stress will help the development and growth of a person, but an excessive degree of stress prevents a person from developing and growing to her greatest potential.
Therefore, this study is attempted for the purpose of clearly understanding the stressors which nursing students experience during clinical training, giving gudiance in desirable direction and improvement of clinical training, and giving the basic materials so that nursing students may train effectively.
The main purposes of this study are as follows;
1. To recognize and understand the stressor which nursing students experience during clinical training.
2. To recognize and understand the relationships among the categories of stressors which nursing students experience during clinical training.
3. To recognize and understand the "State Anxiety Inventory" which nursing students experience during clinical training.
4. To recognize and understand the relationship between categories of stressors and the "State Anxiety Inventory" which nursing students experience during clinical training.
5. To recognize and understand the relationship between the stressors and the general characteristics of the nursing students.
The subjects in this study were 133 nursing students who were 2nd or 3rd grade in D. and R. junior college.
The instrument in this study is the structurized questionnaire which is written out utilizing the Spielberger's "State Anxiety Inventory", reference to sundry records and stressor measurement evaluated through answers to in-depth questions.
The collection of questionnaires took 10 days from April 20, 1984 to April 30, 1984. This researcher visited the 6 training hospitals and explained the purposes of this study to students. After they agreed to this survey, the researcher gave the questionnaire to them, had them answer the questions and collected the questionnaire immediately.
Data analysis included percentage, mean and standard error, x**2 - test, Pearson Correlation Coefficient, t-test and ANOVA through computer statistic disposition.
The results of this study are, briefly, as follows;
1. In "Satisfaction-degree to Specializing in the Science of Nursing," 42.9% of the subjects is revealed as "satisfied" and in "Satisfaction-degree of Clinical Training," 12.8% of the subjects is revealed as "satisfied". In the relationships among the general characteristics, "Satisfaction-degree to Specializing in the Science of Nursing" is positively correlated with "Satisfaction-degree of Clinical Training" (x**2 =25.123 d.f=4 p<0.01).
2. Viewed from each of the categories of stressors which nursing students experience during clinical training, "Nursing Activity" is the category in which nursing students experience most severe stress at a mean 3.291 and "Personal Relations" is the category in which nursing students experience mildest stress at a mean 2.629.
Considering the stressor involved in each category, the results are as follows;
(1) In "Environment," "Unexperienced New Environment" is revealed as the most severe stressor at a mean 3.647 and "Orientation to the Hospital before Clinical Training" is revealed as the stressor causing mildest stress at a mean 2.872.
(2) In "Personal Relations," "Relations with Head Nurse" is revealed as the most severe stressor at a mean 3.114 and "Relations with Patient's Family" is revealed as the stressor causing mildest stress at a mean 2.271.
(3) In "Role", "Insufficiency of Independent Nursing Care" is revealed as he most severe atressor at a mean 3.511 and "Group Meeting" is revealed as the stressor causing mildest stress at a mean 2.346.
(4) In "Ideals and Values of Nursing Care", "Difference between College Training and Hospital Training" is revealed as the most severe stressor at a mean 3.662 and "Diffculty in Adaptation due to Personal Character" is revealed as the stressor causing mildest stress at a mean 2.549.
(5) In "Nursing Activity", "Repetition of Simple and Functional Work during Clinical Training" is revealed as the most severe stressor at a mean 4.023 and "Inconvenience of Uniform" is revealed as the stressor causing mildest stress at a mean 2.316.
3. The relationships among these categories reveals significant correlation in all categories (p<0.01).
4. The "State Anxiety Degree" which nursing students experience during clinical training is revealed as "moderate" anxiety.
5. In relationship between "State Anxiety" and the categories of stressors, he "State Anxiety" is revealed as significant correlation with all categories.
6. Considering the relationship between the categories of stressors and the general characteristics, the results are as follows;
(1) "Environment" is revealed as being positively correlated with "Body Health" and "Satisfaction-degree to Specializing in the Science of Nursing" (p<0.01).
(2) "Ideals and Values of Nursing Care" is revealed as being positively correlated with "Satisfaction-degree of Clinical Training"(p<0.01).
(3) "Role" is revealed as being positively correlated with "Religion" (p<0.05).
(4) "Ideals and Values of Nursing Care" is also revealed as being positively correlated with "Satisfaction-degree to Specializing in the Science of Nursing" (p<0.05).
(5) "Environment," "Personal Relations," and "Nursing Activity" are revealed as being positively correlated with "Satisfaction-degree of Clinical Training" (p<0.05).restrictio
Comparision of group and individual social support on burden and family functioning in families with asthmatic chi
κ°νΈνκ΅μ‘/λ°μ¬[νκΈ]
μ²μμ μλκΈ°μ νν λ§μ±μ§νμΌλ‘ μλκ³Ό κ·Έ κ°μ‘±μκ² μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉλ λ§μ±μ μΈ κ±΄κ°λ¬Έμ μ΄λ€. κ°μ‘±μ μ μ , μ 체, μ¬νμ μ΄λ €μμ μ€μ¬νλ μν μ νλ μ μ©ν λ°©λ²μ μ¬νμ μ§μ§μ΄λ€.
λ³Έ μ°κ΅¬λ μ²μμλ κ°μ‘±μ λΆλ΄κ°μ κ°μμν€κ³ κ°μ‘±κΈ°λ₯μ μ¦μ§μν€κΈ° μν΄ μ§λ¨ μ¬νμ μ§μ§μ κ°λ³ μ¬νμ μ§μ§λ₯Ό μ€μνμ¬ μ¬νμ μ§μ§μ ν¨κ³Όλ₯Ό νμΈνκ³ , μ§λ¨ μ¬νμ μ§μ§κ° κ°λ³ μ¬νμ μ§μ§λ³΄λ€ μ²μμλ κ°μ‘±μ λΆλ΄κ° κ°μμ κ°μ‘±κΈ°λ₯ μ€μ§μ μΌλ§λ ν¨κ³Ό μ°¨μ΄κ° μλμ§λ₯Ό κ·λͺ
νκΈ° μν 무μμ λκ·Έλ£Ή μ¬μ μ¬νμ€κ³μ μ μ¬μ€νμ°κ΅¬μ΄λ€.
μ°κ΅¬μ μ΄λ‘ μ κΈ°νμ μ¬νμ μ§μ§ μ΄λ‘ μ κΈ°μ΄λ‘ νμ¬ μλ―Ένμ μ€κ°μ€(1993)μ λ§μ±μ§νμλ₯Ό λ보λ κ°μ‘±μ λΆλ΄κ°μ λν κ°λ
μ κΈ°νμ μ²μμλ κ°μ‘±μ λΆλ΄κ°κ³Ό κ°μ‘±κΈ°λ₯μ μ μ©νμ¬ λμΆνμλ€.
μ°κ΅¬κΈ°κ°μ 1998λ
2μ 12μΌλΆν° 5μ 29μΌμ΄κ³ , μ°κ΅¬λμμλ Sμμ μμ¬ν AλνλΆμλ³μμ μμκ³Ό μΈλλ₯Ό λ΄μν μ²μμλ κ°μ‘±μΌλ‘ μ§λ£μμΌμ λ°λΌ λκ΅°μΌλ‘ 무μμ λ°°μ νμ¬ μ§λ¨ μ¬νμ μ§μ§κ΅° 18λͺ
, κ°λ³ μ¬νμ μ§μ§κ΅° 21λͺ
μΌλ‘ μ΄ 39λͺ
μ΄μλ€. μ€νμ²μΉμΈ μ¬νμ μ§μ§ κΈ°κ°μ 1-3μ£Όμ 1νμ© 4μ°¨λ‘μ κ±Έμ³μ μ€μνμμΌλ©° 1ν μ 곡μκ°μ 40βΌ90λΆ μ λμλ€.
μ°κ΅¬λꡬλ μλ―Ένμ μ€κ°μ€(199μ‘°μ λΆλ΄κ° μΈ‘μ λꡬμ μμμ²λλ₯Ό ν¨κ» μ¬μ©νμκ³ , κ°μ‘±κΈ°λ₯μ 01son, Portner, Lavee(1985)κ° κ°λ°ν κ°μ‘±μ μ μλ ₯κ³Ό κ²°μλ ₯μ νκ°λꡬ(FACES-111)λ‘ κΉμ€ν(1989)κ° λ²μν κ²μ μ¬μ©νμλ€
μλ£λΆμμ SPSSλ₯Έ μ΄μ©νμ¬ Mann-Whitey test,ΞΊ**2 -test, Wilcoxon sign rank test, t-test, ANOVA, Pearson μκ΄κ³μ, Scheffe μ¬νκ²μ¦,Multiple regressionμΌλ‘ λΆμνμμΌλ©°, μ¬νμ μ§μ§ κ³Όμ μ ν΅ν΄μ λνλ μ²μμλ κ°μ‘±μ λ°μμ λ
Ήμλ μλ£λ₯Ό κ·Όκ±°λ‘νμ¬ λΆμνμλ€.
μ°κ΅¬κ²°κ³Όλ λ€μκ³Ό κ°λ€.
1. μ€νμ²μΉμ μ§λ¨ μ¬νμ μ§μ§κ΅°κ³Ό κ°λ³ μ¬νμ μ§μ§κ΅°μ λμμμ μΌλ°μ νΉμ±, λΆλ΄κ°κ³Ό κ°μ‘±κΈ°λ₯μ μ μν μ°¨μ΄κ° μμ΄μ λκ΅°μ λͺ¨λ νλͺ©μμ μ μ¬νμλ€.
2. μ 1κ°μ€μΈ "μ§λ¨ μ¬νμ μ§μ§λ₯Ό λ°μ μ²μμλ κ°μ‘±μ κ°λ³ μ¬νμ μ§μ§λ₯Ό λ°μ μ²μμλ κ°μ‘±λ³΄λ€ λΆλ΄κ°μ΄ λ κ°μν κ²μ΄λ€"λ μ§λ¨ μ¬νμ μ§μ§κ΅°μ μ²μΉμ ν μ°¨μ΄(Z=-2.874, p= .004)μ κ°λ³ μ¬νμ μ§μ§κ΅°μ μ νμ°¨μ΄(Z=-3.528, p= .000)λ μ μν μ°¨μ΄λ₯Ό λν
λ΄μ΄ μ¬νμ μ§μ§κ° λΆλ΄κ°μ κ°μμν€λ ν¨κ³Όκ° μμλ€. μ€νμ²μΉνμ μ§λ¨ μ¬νμ μ§μ§κ΅°κ³Ό κ°λ³ μ¬νμ μ§μ§κ΅°μ λΆλ΄κ°μ μ§λ¨ μ¬νμ μ§μ§κ° κ°λ³ μ¬νμ μ§μ§λ³΄λ€ λΆλ΄κ°μ΄ λ κ°μνλ κ²½ν₯μ 보μμΌλ, λμ§λ¨κ°μ μ μν μ°¨μ΄λ μμ΄μ(U=174.5,p= .683) μ 1κ°μ€μ μ§μ§λμ§ μμλ€.
3. μ 2κ°μ€μΈ "μ§λ¨ μ¬νμ μ§μ§λ₯Ό λ°μ μ²μμλ κ°μ‘±μ κ°λ³ μ¬νμ μ§μ§λ₯Ό λ°μ μ²μμλ κ°μ‘±λ³΄λ€ κ°μ‘±κΈ°λ₯μ΄ λ μ¦κ°ν κ²μ΄λ€"λ λκ΅°μ κ°μ‘±κΈ°λ₯μ μ²μΉμ ν μ°¨μ΄λ κ°κ° μ μν μ°¨μ΄λ₯Ό 보μ΄μ§ μμλ€(Z=-1.293,p= .196; Z=- .121, p= .904), μ€νμ²μΉνμ μ§λ¨ μ¬νμ μ§μ§κ° κ°λ³ μ¬νμ μ§μ§λ³΄λ€ κ°μ‘±κΈ°λ₯μ΄ λ μ’μμ§λ κ²½ν₯μ 보μμΌλ, λ μ§λ¨κ°μ μ μν μ°¨μ΄λ μμ΄μ(U=153.0, p= .309) μ 2κ°μ€μ μ§μ§λμ§ μμλ€.
4. μ²μμλ κ°μ‘±μ μΌλ°μ νΉμ±μ λ°λ₯Έ λΆλ΄κ°μ μ΄λ¨Έλκ° μΈμ§νλ μλμ μμ‘΄λ(F=3.350, p= .046), μ²μμ λ(F=4.871, p= .013), μκΈμ€ λ°©λ¬Έ νμ(r= .952, p= .024)μ μ μν μ°¨μ΄κ° μμκ³ , κ°μ‘±κΈ°λ₯μ νμ μ±λ³(t=-2.10, p= .045), μμμ
(r= .981, p= .009)κ³Ό μ μν μ°¨μ΄κ° μμλ€.
5. μ²μμλ κ°μ‘±μ λΆλ΄κ°μ μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉλ μμΈ‘λ³μΈμ μ΄λ¨Έλκ° μΈμ§νλ μλμ μ²μμ λ(45%)μ μλμ μμ‘΄λ(51%)κ° μ€λͺ
λ ₯μ κ°μ‘κ³ , κ°μ‘±κΈ°λ₯μ μν₯μ λ―ΈμΉλ λ³μΈμ λΆλ΄κ°(63%)μ΄ μ€λͺ
λ ₯μ 보μλ€.
6. μ²μμλ κ°μ‘±μ λ°μμ λ§λ¨μ μκ°μ΄ κΈΈμ΄μ§μ λ°λΌ κΈμ μ μ¬κ³ λ₯Ό νμΆνμμΌλ©°, κ°μ‘±λ€μ΄ μμ μ κ²½νμ λλκ³ μλ‘ μ 보λ₯Ό μ»κ³ λ¬Έμ¬ν΄κ²°μ ν μ μλ μ²μμλ μ΄λ¨Έλλ₯Ό μν μμ‘°λͺ¨μμ ꡬμ±νμλ€.
μ΄μμ μ°κ΅¬κ²°κ³Όλ₯Ό μ’
ν©ν΄ λ³Ό λ, μ§λ¨ μ¬νμ μ§μ§κ° κ°λ³ μ¬νμ μ§μ§λ³΄λ€ λΆλ΄κ°μ λ κ°μμν€κ³ , κ°μ‘±κΈ°λ₯μ μ¦μ§μν€λ κ²½ν₯μ 보μ΄λ―λ‘ μ λ¬Έκ°νΈμ¬λ μ μ¬ν κ²½νμ κ°μ§λ κ°μ‘±λ€μ λ§λ¨μ μ΄μ§νλ μν μ νμ¬μΌ νλ€.
[μλ¬Έ]
Asthma is a chronic disease of children that has an influence on their health and their families'health. A useful method of intervention to reduce the family mental, physical, or social burden is social support.
The main purpose of this study was to identify the effects of group social support and individual social support on the reduction of burden and improvement in family functioning of families with asthmatic children.
The design of this study was a randomized pre-posttest quasi-experimental design to compare the two experimental groups. The theoretical framework for this study was derived from the study of burden in family caregivers by Suh and Oh(1993) based on the main effect model of social support theories.
The data were collected from February 12, 1998 to May 29, 1998 at the pediatric out patient department of a university hospital located in Suwon city, The sample consisted of 39 family members who were identified as families with asthmatic children. Eighteen subjects were randomly assigned to the group social support group and 21 wereassigned 1? the individual social support group. Pretest and posttest data were collected through interviews using a structured questionnaire.
Group and individual social support as the experimental treatments were carried out. Each group for group social support consisted of four or five family members, who met four times over one to three weeks for 60 to 90 minutes. For the individual
social support group, members were seen for 40 to 70 minutes, four times over one to three weeks.
The instruments used in this study were the Burden Scale developed by Suh & Oh(1993), the Visual Analogue Scale, and the Family Adaptability Cohesion Evaluation Scale(FACES-111) developed by 01son, Portner, and Lavee(1985).
The collected data were analyzed using Mann-Whitney test, x**2-test, Wilcoxon sign rank test, t-test, ANOVA(Scheffe), Pearson correlation coefficient, multiple regression, and social support process and content analysis.
The results are as follow;
1. There was no significant difference before the experimental treatment among the subjects in the group social support group and individual social support group for general characteristics, burden, or family functioning.
2. Hypothesis 1; "There will be a greater reduction on the burden score of the group social support group compared to the individual social support group" was not statistically significant(U=174.5, p= .683). The burden scores showed a significant decrease after participation in social support as compared to before participation for both groups. However there was a tendency for more reduction in the burden scores for the group social support than for individual social support.
3. Hypothesis 2; "There will be a greater improvement in the family functioning scores for the group social support group compared to the individual social support group" was not statistically significant(U=153.0,p= .309). There was a tendency
toward improvement in the family functioning scores of the group social support as compared to that of the individual social support.
4. Considering the relationship between burden and genernal characteristics, it was found that burden was significantly correlated with child's dependence as perceived by mother(F=3.350, p= .046),severity of childhood asthma(F=4.871, p= .013) and rate of visits to the emergency room(r= .952, p= .024). Considering the relationship between family functioning and demographic characteristics, it was found that family functioning was significantly correlated with sex of sibling(t=-2.10, p= .745), and monthly income(r= .981, p= .009).
5. The predictive variables for the burden were severity of childhood asthma(45%), child's dependence as perceived by mother(51%).Burden(63%) was the only predictive variable for family functioning.
6. According to the length of the treatment period, families with asthmatic children displayed affirmative responses, and the families set up a self-help group of mothers with asthmatic children in order to share their experiences, to get information and to solve their problems.
In conclusion, it was found that group social support was the more effective nursing intervention for reducing burden and for family functioning of families with asthmatic children.restrictio