[Measuring end-of-life care efficacy and related factors in the staff members of elderly care facilities].

Q4 Psychology Shinrigaku Kenkyu Pub Date : 2016-12-01 DOI:10.4992/jjpsy.87.15048
Sayaka Kubota, Shinichi Sato
{"title":"[Measuring end-of-life care efficacy and related factors in the staff members of elderly care facilities].","authors":"Sayaka Kubota,&nbsp;Shinichi Sato","doi":"10.4992/jjpsy.87.15048","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>Based on Bandura’s social learning theory, this study conceptualized the end-of-life care efficacy (EoLCE) of elderly care facility staff. In Analysis 1, an EoLCE scale was developed. Factor analysis identified two factors ―instrumental care efficacy and emotional care efficacy— with psychometric adequacy. In Analysis 2, a path analysis was used to examine the relationships between EoLCE and the number of care experiences provided (Care Experiences) as well as the four theory-based sources of self-efficacy: the frequency of feeling a sense of achievement (Achievement), number of opportunities to observe role models, number of opportunities to receive linguistic persuasions (Linguistic Persuasions), and negative emotional responses to end-of-life care. After controlling for these sources, we found that Care Experiences negatively influenced emotional care efficacy. Achievement had the strongest significant relationship with EoLCE. The three other sources showed significant relationships with EoLCE, but there was no relationship between instrumental care efficacy and Linguistic Persuasions. To increase EoLCE, the subjective number of social learning experiences relevant to end-of-life care was important, rather than the number of care experiences provided.</p>","PeriodicalId":53680,"journal":{"name":"Shinrigaku Kenkyu","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.4992/jjpsy.87.15048","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Shinrigaku Kenkyu","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4992/jjpsy.87.15048","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"Psychology","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Based on Bandura’s social learning theory, this study conceptualized the end-of-life care efficacy (EoLCE) of elderly care facility staff. In Analysis 1, an EoLCE scale was developed. Factor analysis identified two factors ―instrumental care efficacy and emotional care efficacy— with psychometric adequacy. In Analysis 2, a path analysis was used to examine the relationships between EoLCE and the number of care experiences provided (Care Experiences) as well as the four theory-based sources of self-efficacy: the frequency of feeling a sense of achievement (Achievement), number of opportunities to observe role models, number of opportunities to receive linguistic persuasions (Linguistic Persuasions), and negative emotional responses to end-of-life care. After controlling for these sources, we found that Care Experiences negatively influenced emotional care efficacy. Achievement had the strongest significant relationship with EoLCE. The three other sources showed significant relationships with EoLCE, but there was no relationship between instrumental care efficacy and Linguistic Persuasions. To increase EoLCE, the subjective number of social learning experiences relevant to end-of-life care was important, rather than the number of care experiences provided.

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
[老年护理机构工作人员临终关怀效能及相关因素的测量]。
本研究以Bandura的社会学习理论为基础,对养老机构工作人员的临终关怀效能进行概念化。在分析1中,开发了EoLCE量表。因子分析发现两个因素-工具护理效能和情绪护理效能-具有心理测量的充分性。在分析2中,我们使用路径分析来检验EoLCE与所提供的护理经验数量(护理经验)之间的关系,以及自我效能感的四个基于理论的来源:感觉成就感的频率(成就),观察榜样的机会数量,接受语言说服的机会数量(语言说服),以及对临终关怀的负面情绪反应。在控制这些来源后,我们发现护理经历对情绪护理效能有负向影响。学业成就与EoLCE的关系最为显著。其他三个来源显示与EoLCE有显著关系,但工具护理疗效与语言说服之间没有关系。为了提高EoLCE,与临终关怀相关的社会学习经验的主观数量是重要的,而不是提供的护理经验的数量。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Shinrigaku Kenkyu
Shinrigaku Kenkyu Psychology-Psychology (all)
CiteScore
0.40
自引率
0.00%
发文量
36
期刊最新文献
Development of the Japanese version of the Peer Conflict Scale Development of the Japanese version of the Theories of Mind Wandering Scale and testing its reliability and validity Development of the Japanese version of the Financial Threat Scale Do changes in beliefs improve creativity? Investigation of an odor intensity evaluation:
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1