|
In this paper, I will examine the variables influencing the Quality of Life of arthritis patients and present basic materials which help arthritis patients have positive thinking in life and ultimately lead a satisfactory life. The subjects for this study are 231 inpatients and outpatients with arthritis living in J and K city in Chonbug Province. For the analysis of collected data I employed the SAS program. The variables for characteristics and the quality of life were analysed by descriptive statistics. T-test and ANOVA, and the relations among variables were analysed through Pearson Correlation; the Regression method was employed to predict the factors affecting duality of life. For the validity of reliance on measuring equipment Cronbach Alpha was used. The results of the study are as follows : (1) The mean score of qualify of life of arthritis patients is 3.09(5 in the maximum). The general characteristics which affect the quality of life are age(F=5.13, p=0.0006), standard of education(F=6.49, p=0.0003), marriage status(F=7.77, p=0.0005), monthly pay(F=4.37 p=0.0020), medical benefits(F=4.85, p=0.0087), and supports(F=4.39, p =0.0050). For the disease-related characteristics, there is a significant difference in the 6 items: pain control method(F=5.92, p= 0.0002), physical therapy(F=3.25, p=0.013), whethere or not patients exercise(F=4.62, p=0.0000), regularity of exercise(F=4.79, p=0.0000), frequency of exercise(F=6.29, p=0.0001), and amount of exercise(F=4.62, p =0.0043). Depending on the type of arthritis, there is also a significant difference in the degree of pain felt. The patients with infectious arthritis suffer from pain the most, followed by those with gout, rheumatism and degenerative arthritis, in that order. Although statistics don’t show any convincing evidence, those with gout perceive that they are in best health condition, followed by those with rheumatism, degenerative arthritis, and infectious arthritis, in that order(F=2.23, p = 0.0669). (2) The quality of life of arthritis patients is correlated positively with perceived health status(r=0.56, p=0.0001), health promoting behavior(r =0.53. p=0.0001), family support(r=0.46, p=0.0001), amount of exercise(r=0.36, p=0.0071), ADL(r=0.36, p=0.0001), HLOC(r=0.32, p=0.0001), frequency of exercise(r=0.32, p=0.0001) in that order, while correlated negatively with the degree of pain felt(r=-0.32, p=0.0001), the number of pain regions(r=-0.19, p=0.0041), and the duration of pain(r=-0.14, p = 0.0279). (3) Regression analysis reveals that the most powerful predictor of the quality of life is perceived health status, which account for 31.11%. The other predictors of the duality of life, which account for 60.22%, are health promoting behavior(16.51%), family support(3.81%), ADL(2.52%), gender(1.86%), the number of family members(1.36%), level of pain(1.24%), duration of pain(1.08%), and level of education(0.67%). The results of the study show that perceived health status and health promoting behavior are the two most important variables. However, considering that the perceived health condition is difficult to control by nursing intervention, it is suggested that the level of expectation for patients, must be decided first, and the health promoting behavior and the family support influencing the quality of life must be taken into account as targets for nursing intervention. As a way of controlling the quality of life, I think that a more comprehensive approach comprising the above important variables along with demographic and general characteristics is needed. I also suggest that we must continue to explore the variables affecting the quality of life and include those variables in nursing intervention
|