PDF(764 KB)
PDF(764 KB)
PDF(764 KB)
合肥市某高校高龄老人生活质量评价及相关因素分析
Assessment of quality of life and its related factors in elderly residents at a university in Hefei
目的 探讨合肥市某高校高龄老人生活质量状况及相关影响因素。方法 采用方便抽样的方法,以合肥市某高校80岁及以上的215名高龄老人为研究对象。采取入户面对面访谈的方式进行问卷调查,内容包括一般人口学和日常生活能力量表(ADL)、社会支持评定量表(SSRS)及世界卫生组织生活质量简表(WHOQOL-BREF)。采用多元线性回归分析高龄老人人口学特征、生活自理能力、共病、自评身体状况、自评经济水平及社会支持对生活质量的影响。结果 共调查215名高龄老人,他们的生理、心理、社会关系及环境维度得分分别为(50.2±15.3)(53.9±15.4)(56.8±11.5)(55.6±13.9)分。自评身体状况越好(β=3.609)、没有共病(β=9.095)、自评经济水平越高(β=3.209)的高龄老人,生理维度得分越高(P值均<0.05);年龄越小(β=-4.790)、自评身体状况越好(β=3.522)、自评经济水平越高(β=5.497)的高龄老人,心理维度得分越高(P值均<0.05);目前有配偶(β=-3.303)、自评经济水平越高(β=3.835)的高龄老人,社会关系维度得分越高;无共病(β=5.894)、自评经济水平越高(β=4.975)的高龄老人,环境维度得分越高。社会支持得分高的高龄老人在生理维度(β=8.470)、心理维度(β=10.670)、社会关系维度(β=3.770)和环境维度(β=8.463)得分均较高(P值均<0.05)。结论 合肥市某高校高龄老人总体生活质量水平不高,卫生保健医生及社会工作者应关注高龄老人的生活质量。
Objective To explore the quality of life and related influencing factors of the elderly in a university in Hefei. Methods The research utilized a convenience sampling approach,and 215 elderly participants aged 80 years and above from a university in Hefei were selected as the study subjects.Data collection was conducted through face-to-face interviews,the questionnaire encompassed general demographic information,the Activities of Daily Living (ADL) scale,the Social Support Rating Scale (SSRS),and the World Health Organization Quality of Life Brief Version (WHOQOL-BREF).Multiple linear regression analysis was used to examine the impacts of demographic characteristics,self-care ability,comorbidities,self-rated health status,self-rated economic level,and social support on the quality of life in the elderly. Results A total of 215 elderly individuals were surveyed,and their scores in the physical,psychological,social relationships,and environmental domains were (50.2±15.3)(53.9±15.4)(56.8±11.5),and (55.6±13.9),respectively.The elderly individuals with better self-rated physical health (β=3.609), no comorbidity (β=9.095), and better self-rated economic level (β=3.209) had higher scores in the physiological dimension (all P<0.05). Those who were younger(β=-4.790),had better self-rated physical health (β=3.522),and better self-rated economic level (β=5.497) scored higher in the psychological dimension (P<0.05). Those who currently had a spouse (β=-3.303) and better self-rated economic level (β=3.835) scored higher in the social relationship dimension. Those without comorbidity (β=5.894) and with better self-rated economic level (β=4.975) scored higher in the environmental dimension. The elderly individuals with higher social support scores also had higher scores in the physiological dimension (β=8.470), psychological dimension (β=10.670), social relationship dimension (β=3.770), and environmental dimension (β=8.463) (all P< 0.05). Conclusion The overall quality of life of the elderly in the university in Hefei is not high,the healthcare doctors and social workers should pay attention to the quality of life of the elderly.
| [1] |
国家统计局. 第七次全国人口普查公报(第五号)[EB/OL].(2021-05-11)[2022-03-26]. https://www.stats.gov.cn/xxgk/sjfb/zxfb2020/202105/t20210511_1817200.html.
|
| [2] |
Given the multitude of risk factors for depression in modern society and given the negative consequences of depressive problems for successful ageing, investigating resilience in relation to depression may help identifying entry points for reducing the burden of morbidity. Research on resilience begins with the realisation that individuals may demonstrate good physical or psychological functioning despite being exposed to risk experiences that can have serious negative impact on functioning. Interest in investigating resilience within ageing research has been increasing. Among the approaches toward investigating resilience are so-called a priori approaches, where criteria for inferring resilience are established a priori. In this editorial, we highlight some of the advantages of taking a priori approaches to the study of resilience and we touch on the implications for a priori approaches for the topic of resilience and depression. We argue that depression should take a prominent role in resilience research, because depression is strongly associated with opportunities for successful ageing.
|
| [3] |
中华预防医学会. 中国高龄老人血压水平适宜范围指南(T/CPMA017-2020)[J]. 中华高血压杂志, 2021, 29(3):220-227+200.
|
| [4] |
王贵猛, 崔香淑, 于文婧, 等. 社区高龄老人睡眠障碍研究的范围综述[J]. 中国全科医学, 2024, 27(27):3446-3452.
背景 随着我国老龄化程度的加深和人均寿命的延长，高龄老年人（≥80岁）睡眠障碍受到广泛关注，睡眠障碍作为常见问题之一，严重影响高龄老年人的生活质量和身心健康，并能加重或诱发疾病。 目的 对社区高龄老年人睡眠障碍研究进行范围综述，为我国社区高龄老年人睡眠障碍的早期诊治提供指导。 方法 根据范围综述的研究方法，检索PubMed、Embase、CINAHL、Web of Science、Cochrane Library、OpenGrey、中国生物医学文献服务系统、中国知网、万方数据知识服务平台、维普网数据库中有关社区高龄老年人睡眠障碍的文献，检索时间为建库至2023-03-15，由2名研究者独立筛选文献并提取文献的基本特征（作者、发表时间、国家、研究类型、样本量、评估工具或方式、患病率、研究结果）。 结果 共检索10 486篇文献，最终纳入21篇文献，其中英文文献14篇，中文文献7篇；横断面研究16篇，类实验研究2篇，纵向研究3篇。分析结果表明，睡眠障碍在社区高龄老年人群中较为普遍（患病率在10.0%~60.3% ）且有严重的不良影响；共使用了9种工具或方式对其进行评估，其中包括3种结构化量表，较为常用的量表为匹兹堡睡眠指数量表（PSQI）；社区高龄老年人睡眠障碍的影响因素分为社会人口学因素、身体状况及疾病相关因素、心理及行为特征因素；社区高龄老年人睡眠障碍的干预措施包括音乐疗法和治疗与交互模式结合的干预小组，但现有的预防与干预研究较少。 结论 社区高龄老年人群的睡眠障碍患病率较高具有严重的不良影响，国内对社区高龄老年人的睡眠障碍认知不足，测评工具种类较少且缺乏特异性，影响因素复杂多样，预防及干预研究较为匮乏。
|
| [5] |
王汕珊, 罗雅之, 宁红彤, 等. 城市隔代抚养老人抚养情况、知觉压力、社会支持及其对生活质量的影响[J]. 中国老年学杂志, 2023, 43(3):743-747.
|
| [6] |
常生活能力量表(ADL). 中国微侵袭神经外科杂志, 2006, 11(11):516.
|
| [7] |
都元涛, 方积乾. 世界卫生组织生存质量测定量表中文版介绍及其使用说明[J]. 现代康复, 2000, 4(8):1127-1129+1145.
|
| [8] |
肖水源. 《社会支持评定量表》的理论基础与研究应用[J]. 临床精神医学杂志, 1994, 4(2):98-100.
|
| [9] |
姚远. 我国老年人生活质量研究的创新性成果—读老龄蓝皮书《中国老年人生活质量发展报告(2019)》[J]. 老龄科学研究, 2020, 8(1):13-17.
|
| [10] |
张雪莹, 赵学芳, 句连云. 苏州市715名老年人慢性病认知及行为现况调查[J]. 安徽预防医学杂志, 2021, 27(2):95-99.
|
| [11] |
|
| [12] |
|
| [13] |
张泽云, 袁满琼, 石再兴, 等. 中国中老年人共病发展轨迹及其对新发失能的影响[J]. 中华流行病学杂志, 2022, 43(12):1893-1899.
|
| [14] |
谢博钦, 陈利群, 刘成成, 等. 社区高龄独居老年人生活质量现状及影响因素分析[J]. 护士进修杂志, 2022, 37(1):8-14.
|
| [15] |
陆珊珊. 安徽省某农村地区老年人生活质量状况及其影响因素研究[D]. 合肥: 安徽医科大学, 2016.
|
| [16] |
|
/
| 〈 |
|
〉 |
