为什么老年人护理网络的构成与心理健康有关:自我决定理论的应用。

IF 2.8 3区 医学 Q3 GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY Aging & Mental Health Pub Date : 2024-07-03 DOI:10.1080/13607863.2024.2373405
J C Swinkels, J Abbing, M I Broese van Groenou
{"title":"为什么老年人护理网络的构成与心理健康有关:自我决定理论的应用。","authors":"J C Swinkels, J Abbing, M I Broese van Groenou","doi":"10.1080/13607863.2024.2373405","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Older care recipients have different types of care networks, varying from spouse-only to large mixed care networks, that add to different levels of wellbeing. Applying Self-Determination Theory (SDT) to the care context, we argue that the care network composition may foster or hamper the three basic needs for wellbeing: relatedness, autonomy and competence.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Data are from ten observations between 1992 and 2022 of the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (<i>N</i> = 18,434 observations from 4,837 older Dutch adults). Five care network types are used: no care, partner, informal, formal or privately paid care. Mixed-hybrid-multilevel regression analysis of depressive symptoms as measure of wellbeing is applied on care network type and loneliness, mastery and care sufficiency as indicators of the three basic needs for wellbeing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Receiving care from a partner care network is, compared to the formal care network, the most negatively associated with depressive symptoms, followed by informal care and privately paid care. Differences in care network types existed in loneliness and care sufficiency, but not in mastery, and in part explained the association between care network types and depressive symptoms. Results of between and within effects are comparable.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Using a rich data set and advanced methodology support the hypotheses that formal care networks hamper wellbeing due to insufficient care and increased loneliness, in particular compared to partner and informal care. The role of mastery was less important, possibly because it does not measure care related level of control.</p>","PeriodicalId":55546,"journal":{"name":"Aging & Mental Health","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-07-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Why is the composition of older adults' care network associated with psychological wellbeing: an application of the self-determination theory.\",\"authors\":\"J C Swinkels, J Abbing, M I Broese van Groenou\",\"doi\":\"10.1080/13607863.2024.2373405\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>Older care recipients have different types of care networks, varying from spouse-only to large mixed care networks, that add to different levels of wellbeing. Applying Self-Determination Theory (SDT) to the care context, we argue that the care network composition may foster or hamper the three basic needs for wellbeing: relatedness, autonomy and competence.</p><p><strong>Method: </strong>Data are from ten observations between 1992 and 2022 of the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (<i>N</i> = 18,434 observations from 4,837 older Dutch adults). Five care network types are used: no care, partner, informal, formal or privately paid care. Mixed-hybrid-multilevel regression analysis of depressive symptoms as measure of wellbeing is applied on care network type and loneliness, mastery and care sufficiency as indicators of the three basic needs for wellbeing.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Receiving care from a partner care network is, compared to the formal care network, the most negatively associated with depressive symptoms, followed by informal care and privately paid care. Differences in care network types existed in loneliness and care sufficiency, but not in mastery, and in part explained the association between care network types and depressive symptoms. Results of between and within effects are comparable.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Using a rich data set and advanced methodology support the hypotheses that formal care networks hamper wellbeing due to insufficient care and increased loneliness, in particular compared to partner and informal care. The role of mastery was less important, possibly because it does not measure care related level of control.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":55546,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Aging & Mental Health\",\"volume\":null,\"pages\":null},\"PeriodicalIF\":2.8000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-07-03\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Aging & Mental Health\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2024.2373405\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q3\",\"JCRName\":\"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Aging & Mental Health","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/13607863.2024.2373405","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"GERIATRICS & GERONTOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:老年护理对象拥有不同类型的护理网络,从仅有配偶的网络到大型混合护理网络,这些网络会增加不同程度的幸福感。我们将自我决定理论(SDT)应用到护理环境中,认为护理网络的构成可能会促进或阻碍幸福感的三种基本需求:亲情、自主和能力:数据来自阿姆斯特丹老龄化纵向研究(Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam)1992 年至 2022 年间的十次观察(N = 18,434 次观察,来自 4,837 名荷兰老年人)。使用了五种护理网络类型:无护理、伴侣护理、非正式护理、正式护理或私人付费护理。将抑郁症状作为衡量幸福感的指标,对护理网络类型以及孤独感、掌握感和护理充足度作为幸福感的三个基本需求指标进行了混合-混合-多层次回归分析:与正规护理网络相比,接受伴侣护理网络的护理与抑郁症状的负相关程度最高,其次是非正规护理和私人付费护理。护理网络类型的差异存在于孤独感和护理充分性方面,但不存在于掌握程度方面,这在一定程度上解释了护理网络类型与抑郁症状之间的关系。两者之间和内部效应的结果具有可比性:利用丰富的数据集和先进的方法支持了以下假设:与伴侣和非正规护理相比,正规护理网络因护理不足和孤独感增加而影响幸福感。主观能动性的作用不太重要,这可能是因为它不能衡量与护理相关的控制水平。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
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
Why is the composition of older adults' care network associated with psychological wellbeing: an application of the self-determination theory.

Objectives: Older care recipients have different types of care networks, varying from spouse-only to large mixed care networks, that add to different levels of wellbeing. Applying Self-Determination Theory (SDT) to the care context, we argue that the care network composition may foster or hamper the three basic needs for wellbeing: relatedness, autonomy and competence.

Method: Data are from ten observations between 1992 and 2022 of the Longitudinal Aging Study Amsterdam (N = 18,434 observations from 4,837 older Dutch adults). Five care network types are used: no care, partner, informal, formal or privately paid care. Mixed-hybrid-multilevel regression analysis of depressive symptoms as measure of wellbeing is applied on care network type and loneliness, mastery and care sufficiency as indicators of the three basic needs for wellbeing.

Results: Receiving care from a partner care network is, compared to the formal care network, the most negatively associated with depressive symptoms, followed by informal care and privately paid care. Differences in care network types existed in loneliness and care sufficiency, but not in mastery, and in part explained the association between care network types and depressive symptoms. Results of between and within effects are comparable.

Conclusion: Using a rich data set and advanced methodology support the hypotheses that formal care networks hamper wellbeing due to insufficient care and increased loneliness, in particular compared to partner and informal care. The role of mastery was less important, possibly because it does not measure care related level of control.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
Aging & Mental Health
Aging & Mental Health 医学-精神病学
CiteScore
7.00
自引率
2.90%
发文量
176
审稿时长
4-8 weeks
期刊介绍: Aging & Mental Health provides a leading international forum for the rapidly expanding field which investigates the relationship between the aging process and mental health. The journal addresses the mental changes associated with normal and abnormal or pathological aging, as well as the psychological and psychiatric problems of the aging population. The journal also has a strong commitment to interdisciplinary and innovative approaches that explore new topics and methods. Aging & Mental Health covers the biological, psychological and social aspects of aging as they relate to mental health. In particular it encourages an integrated approach for examining various biopsychosocial processes and etiological factors associated with psychological changes in the elderly. It also emphasizes the various strategies, therapies and services which may be directed at improving the mental health of the elderly and their families. In this way the journal promotes a strong alliance among the theoretical, experimental and applied sciences across a range of issues affecting mental health and aging. The emphasis of the journal is on rigorous quantitative, and qualitative, research and, high quality innovative studies on emerging topics.
期刊最新文献
Examining mental health and autonomic function as putative mediators of the relationship between sleep and trajectories of cognitive function: findings from the Irish longitudinal study on ageing (TILDA). Exploring the associations between structural and functional aspects of social relationships and cognition in very old age. Sensory impairments and depressive symptoms in Europe: a cross-national cohort study. Co-occurrence of depressive and anxious symptoms and their influence on self-rated health: a national representative survey among Chinese older adults. Association between loneliness and mild cognitive impairment in older adults: a meta-analysis of longitudinal studies.
×
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