
Chinese General Practice ›› 2022, Vol. 25 ›› Issue (01): 100-108.DOI: 10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2021.00.307
Special Issue: 老年问题最新文章合辑; 老年人群健康最新文章合辑
• Original Research·Community-based Health Management for Older Adults • Previous Articles Next Articles
Mediating Role of Family Function between Disability Severity and Family Resilience in Home-living Older Adults with Disability in Minority Areas of Xinjiang
Shihezi University School of Medicine,Shihezi 832002,China
*Corresponding author:WANG Yuhuan,Professor,Master supervisor;E-mail:wangyuhuan@shzu.edu.en
Received:2021-06-10
Revised:2021-09-18
Published:2022-01-05
Online:2021-12-29
通讯作者:
王玉环
基金资助:CLC Number:
ZHANG Mengmeng, WANG Yuhuan, TANG Xueting, ZHAO Shuhua, ZHOU Jia.
Mediating Role of Family Function between Disability Severity and Family Resilience in Home-living Older Adults with Disability in Minority Areas of Xinjiang [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2022, 25(01): 100-108.
Add to citation manager EndNote|Ris|BibTeX
URL: https://www.chinagp.net/EN/10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2021.00.307
| 项目 | 例(户)数 | FRS得分 | H值 | P值 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 失能程度 | 13.320 | 0.001 | |||
| 轻度 | 202 | 84.00(28.00) | |||
| 中度 | 173 | 74.00(21.25) | |||
| 重度 | 56 | 72.00(22.63) | |||
| 家庭功能 | 167.805 | <0.001 | |||
| 良好 | 200 | 92.75(20.50) | |||
| 中度障碍 | 188 | 71.00(14.00) | |||
| 重度障碍 | 43 | 59.00(14.50) | |||
Table 1 Comparison of family resilience scores in home-living older adults with different disability levels,and families with different functional status
| 项目 | 例(户)数 | FRS得分 | H值 | P值 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 失能程度 | 13.320 | 0.001 | |||
| 轻度 | 202 | 84.00(28.00) | |||
| 中度 | 173 | 74.00(21.25) | |||
| 重度 | 56 | 72.00(22.63) | |||
| 家庭功能 | 167.805 | <0.001 | |||
| 良好 | 200 | 92.75(20.50) | |||
| 中度障碍 | 188 | 71.00(14.00) | |||
| 重度障碍 | 43 | 59.00(14.50) | |||
| 基本情况 | 例(户)数 | FRS得分 | Z(H)值 | P值 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 居家失能老年人 | ||||||
| 性别 | -0.109 | 0.914 | ||||
| 男 | 162 | 77.75(26.00) | ||||
| 女 | 269 | 77.00(27.25) | ||||
| 年龄(岁) | 1.277a | 0.528 | ||||
| 60~69 | 297 | 77.50(26.25) | ||||
| 70~79 | 109 | 74.00(26.75) | ||||
| ≥80 | 25 | 80.50(34.25) | ||||
| 民族 | -0.908 | 0.364 | ||||
| 哈萨克族 | 113 | 75.00(24.00) | ||||
| 维吾尔族 | 318 | 78.25(27.63) | ||||
| 婚姻状况 | -0.004 | 0.997 | ||||
| 在婚 | 311 | 77.00(25.50) | ||||
| 离异或丧偶 | 120 | 77.00(28.88) | ||||
| 失能持续时间(年) | 6.343a | 0.042 | ||||
| ≤2 | 109 | 72.00(30.50) | ||||
| 3~4 | 113 | 76.00(24.00) | ||||
| ≥5 | 209 | 79.50(25.50) | ||||
| 认知状况 | 2.102 | 0.036 | ||||
| 正常 | 395 | 77.50(27.00) | ||||
| 认知功能障碍 | 36 | 75.00(24.13) | ||||
| 居家主要照护者 | ||||||
| 性别 | 0.557 | 0.577 | ||||
| 男 | 175 | 76.00(27.00) | ||||
| 女 | 256 | 77.75(25.38) | ||||
| 年龄(岁) | 10.495a | 0.005 | ||||
| ≤39 | 172 | 79.50(24.63) | ||||
| 40~59 | 93 | 80.50.(32.75) | ||||
| ≥60 | 166 | 73.25(26.25) | ||||
| 婚姻状况 | 0.743a | 0.690 | ||||
| 在婚 | 400 | 77.00(26.00) | ||||
| 离异或丧偶 | 8 | 86.00(55.38) | ||||
| 未婚 | 23 | 73.00(41.00) | ||||
| 文化程度 | 1.869a | 0.393 | ||||
| 文盲 | 121 | 78.00(30.25) | ||||
| 初中及以下 | 271 | 76.50(26.50) | ||||
| 高中/中专及以上 | 39 | 83.00(18.00) | ||||
| 就业状况 | 2.933a | 0.231 | ||||
| 全职 | 199 | 78.00(26.00) | ||||
| 无业 | 173 | 74.50(28.25) | ||||
| 退休 | 59 | 81.00(27.00) | ||||
| 照护年限(年) | 14.323a | 0.002 | ||||
| <1 | 17 | 85.50(31.00) | ||||
| 1~2 | 80 | 70.50(27.50) | ||||
| 3~4 | 153 | 77.50(25.25) | ||||
| >4 | 181 | 79.50(28.25) | ||||
| 家庭核心人物 | ||||||
| 性别 | -1.047 | 0.295 | ||||
| 男 | 359 | 78.00(26.88) | ||||
| 女 | 72 | 76.00(29.50) | ||||
| 年龄(岁) | 1.610a | 0.447 | ||||
| ≤39 | 120 | 77.75(22.75) | ||||
| 40~59 | 59 | 80.50(27.00) | ||||
| ≥60 | 252 | 76.00(28.88) | ||||
| 婚姻状况 | 6.114a | 0.047 | ||||
| 在婚 | 388 | 77.50(27.00) | ||||
| 离异或丧偶 | 26 | 73.50(23.00) | ||||
| 未婚 | 17 | 80.00(24.75) | ||||
| 文化程度 | 3.846a | 0.146 | ||||
| 文盲 | 142 | 77.50(29.00) | ||||
| 初中及以下 | 252 | 78.00(25.00) | ||||
| 高中/中专及以上 | 37 | 70.00(18.63) | ||||
| 就业状况 | 1.191a | 0.551 | ||||
| 全职 | 185 | 77.00(25.50) | ||||
| 无业 | 169 | 77.50(27.75) | ||||
| 退休 | 77 | 79.50(27.50) | ||||
| 家庭状况 | ||||||
| 家庭月收入(元) | 33.440a | <0.001 | ||||
| <1 500 | 131 | 72.50(27.50) | ||||
| 1 500~3 000 | 161 | 74.00(23.50) | ||||
| >3 000 | 139 | 83.50(27.50) | ||||
| 家庭类型 | 31.689a | <0.001 | ||||
| 核心家庭 | 173 | 74.00(29.25) | ||||
| 主干家庭 | 226 | 80.50(21.13) | ||||
| 其他 | 32 | 61.00(21.00) | ||||
Table 2 Comparison of family resilience assessed by socio-demographic data of older adults with disability,their primary care givers,and core family members as well as family status
| 基本情况 | 例(户)数 | FRS得分 | Z(H)值 | P值 | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 居家失能老年人 | ||||||
| 性别 | -0.109 | 0.914 | ||||
| 男 | 162 | 77.75(26.00) | ||||
| 女 | 269 | 77.00(27.25) | ||||
| 年龄(岁) | 1.277a | 0.528 | ||||
| 60~69 | 297 | 77.50(26.25) | ||||
| 70~79 | 109 | 74.00(26.75) | ||||
| ≥80 | 25 | 80.50(34.25) | ||||
| 民族 | -0.908 | 0.364 | ||||
| 哈萨克族 | 113 | 75.00(24.00) | ||||
| 维吾尔族 | 318 | 78.25(27.63) | ||||
| 婚姻状况 | -0.004 | 0.997 | ||||
| 在婚 | 311 | 77.00(25.50) | ||||
| 离异或丧偶 | 120 | 77.00(28.88) | ||||
| 失能持续时间(年) | 6.343a | 0.042 | ||||
| ≤2 | 109 | 72.00(30.50) | ||||
| 3~4 | 113 | 76.00(24.00) | ||||
| ≥5 | 209 | 79.50(25.50) | ||||
| 认知状况 | 2.102 | 0.036 | ||||
| 正常 | 395 | 77.50(27.00) | ||||
| 认知功能障碍 | 36 | 75.00(24.13) | ||||
| 居家主要照护者 | ||||||
| 性别 | 0.557 | 0.577 | ||||
| 男 | 175 | 76.00(27.00) | ||||
| 女 | 256 | 77.75(25.38) | ||||
| 年龄(岁) | 10.495a | 0.005 | ||||
| ≤39 | 172 | 79.50(24.63) | ||||
| 40~59 | 93 | 80.50.(32.75) | ||||
| ≥60 | 166 | 73.25(26.25) | ||||
| 婚姻状况 | 0.743a | 0.690 | ||||
| 在婚 | 400 | 77.00(26.00) | ||||
| 离异或丧偶 | 8 | 86.00(55.38) | ||||
| 未婚 | 23 | 73.00(41.00) | ||||
| 文化程度 | 1.869a | 0.393 | ||||
| 文盲 | 121 | 78.00(30.25) | ||||
| 初中及以下 | 271 | 76.50(26.50) | ||||
| 高中/中专及以上 | 39 | 83.00(18.00) | ||||
| 就业状况 | 2.933a | 0.231 | ||||
| 全职 | 199 | 78.00(26.00) | ||||
| 无业 | 173 | 74.50(28.25) | ||||
| 退休 | 59 | 81.00(27.00) | ||||
| 照护年限(年) | 14.323a | 0.002 | ||||
| <1 | 17 | 85.50(31.00) | ||||
| 1~2 | 80 | 70.50(27.50) | ||||
| 3~4 | 153 | 77.50(25.25) | ||||
| >4 | 181 | 79.50(28.25) | ||||
| 家庭核心人物 | ||||||
| 性别 | -1.047 | 0.295 | ||||
| 男 | 359 | 78.00(26.88) | ||||
| 女 | 72 | 76.00(29.50) | ||||
| 年龄(岁) | 1.610a | 0.447 | ||||
| ≤39 | 120 | 77.75(22.75) | ||||
| 40~59 | 59 | 80.50(27.00) | ||||
| ≥60 | 252 | 76.00(28.88) | ||||
| 婚姻状况 | 6.114a | 0.047 | ||||
| 在婚 | 388 | 77.50(27.00) | ||||
| 离异或丧偶 | 26 | 73.50(23.00) | ||||
| 未婚 | 17 | 80.00(24.75) | ||||
| 文化程度 | 3.846a | 0.146 | ||||
| 文盲 | 142 | 77.50(29.00) | ||||
| 初中及以下 | 252 | 78.00(25.00) | ||||
| 高中/中专及以上 | 37 | 70.00(18.63) | ||||
| 就业状况 | 1.191a | 0.551 | ||||
| 全职 | 185 | 77.00(25.50) | ||||
| 无业 | 169 | 77.50(27.75) | ||||
| 退休 | 77 | 79.50(27.50) | ||||
| 家庭状况 | ||||||
| 家庭月收入(元) | 33.440a | <0.001 | ||||
| <1 500 | 131 | 72.50(27.50) | ||||
| 1 500~3 000 | 161 | 74.00(23.50) | ||||
| >3 000 | 139 | 83.50(27.50) | ||||
| 家庭类型 | 31.689a | <0.001 | ||||
| 核心家庭 | 173 | 74.00(29.25) | ||||
| 主干家庭 | 226 | 80.50(21.13) | ||||
| 其他 | 32 | 61.00(21.00) | ||||
| 项目 | 家庭抗逆力 | 失能程度 | 家庭功能及各维度 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 家庭功能 | 适应度 | 合作度 | 成长度 | 情感度 | 亲密度 | |||||
| 家庭抗逆力 | 1.000 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| 失能程度 | -0.342a | 1.000 | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| 家庭功能 | 0.726a | -0.274a | 1.000 | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| 适应度 | 0.552a | -0.240a | 0.771a | 1.000 | - | - | - | - | ||
| 合作度 | 0.574a | -0.229a | 0.717a | 0.527a | 1.000 | - | - | - | ||
| 成长度 | 0.591a | -0.233a | 0.755a | 0.437a | 0.463a | 1.000 | - | - | ||
| 情感度 | 0.524a | -0.174a | 0.785a | 0.496a | 0.373a | 0.496a | 1.000 | - | ||
| 亲密度 | 0.492a | -0.161a | 0.743a | 0.514a | 0.386a | 0.365a | 0.568a | 1.000 | ||
Table 3 The correlation of disability severity with family function and its components as well as family resilience in home-living older adults with disability
| 项目 | 家庭抗逆力 | 失能程度 | 家庭功能及各维度 | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 家庭功能 | 适应度 | 合作度 | 成长度 | 情感度 | 亲密度 | |||||
| 家庭抗逆力 | 1.000 | - | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| 失能程度 | -0.342a | 1.000 | - | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| 家庭功能 | 0.726a | -0.274a | 1.000 | - | - | - | - | - | ||
| 适应度 | 0.552a | -0.240a | 0.771a | 1.000 | - | - | - | - | ||
| 合作度 | 0.574a | -0.229a | 0.717a | 0.527a | 1.000 | - | - | - | ||
| 成长度 | 0.591a | -0.233a | 0.755a | 0.437a | 0.463a | 1.000 | - | - | ||
| 情感度 | 0.524a | -0.174a | 0.785a | 0.496a | 0.373a | 0.496a | 1.000 | - | ||
| 亲密度 | 0.492a | -0.161a | 0.743a | 0.514a | 0.386a | 0.365a | 0.568a | 1.000 | ||
Figure 1 The mediating effect of family function on the relationship between disability severity and family resilience in home-living older adults with disability
| 变量 | b | b' | SE | t值 | P值 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.914 | -0.284 | 0.160 | -5.697 | <0.001 | |
| M1家庭功能 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.105 | -0.278 | 0.019 | -5.429 | <0.001 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.300 | 0.686 | 0.118 | 20.368 | <0.001 | |
| M1家庭功能 | 5.855 | -0.093 | 0.287 | -2.547 | 0.011 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.914 | -0.284 | 0.160 | -5.697 | <0.001 | |
| M2家庭功能-适应度 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.021 | -0.234 | 0.005 | -4.435 | <0.001 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.561 | 0.470 | 1.445 | 11.729 | <0.001 | |
| M2家庭功能-适应度 | 16.951 | -0.174 | 0.143 | -3.931 | <0.001 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.914 | -0.284 | 0.160 | -5.697 | <0.001 | |
| M3家庭功能-合作度 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.025 | -0.259 | 0.005 | -4.956 | <0.001 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.483 | 0.517 | 1.445 | 13.194 | <0.001 | |
| M3家庭功能-合作度 | 17.559 | -0.150 | 0.143 | -3.475 | 0.001 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.914 | -0.284 | 0.160 | -5.697 | <0.001 | |
| M4家庭功能-成长度 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.029 | -0.255 | 0.006 | -4.909 | <0.001 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.474 | 0.537 | 1.093 | 13.831 | <0.001 | |
| M4家庭功能-成长度 | 15.120 | -0.147 | 0.137 | -3.459 | 0.001 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.914 | -0.284 | 0.160 | -5.697 | <0.001 | |
| M5家庭功能-情感度 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.016 | -0.148 | 0.006 | -2.790 | 0.006 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.692 | 0.464 | 1.219 | 11.663 | <0.001 | |
| M5家庭功能-情感度 | 14.221 | -0.215 | 0.141 | -4.915 | <0.001 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.914 | -0.284 | 0.160 | -5.697 | <0.001 | |
| M6家庭功能-亲密度 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.015 | -0.158 | 0.005 | -2.942 | 0.003 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.683 | 0.454 | 1.328 | 11.464 | <0.001 | |
| M6家庭功能-亲密度 | 15.221 | -0.212 | 0.142 | -4.826 | <0.001 | |
Table 4 Multiple linear regression analysis of mediating effects of family function and its components between disability severity and family resilience in home-living older adults with disability
| 变量 | b | b' | SE | t值 | P值 | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.914 | -0.284 | 0.160 | -5.697 | <0.001 | |
| M1家庭功能 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.105 | -0.278 | 0.019 | -5.429 | <0.001 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.300 | 0.686 | 0.118 | 20.368 | <0.001 | |
| M1家庭功能 | 5.855 | -0.093 | 0.287 | -2.547 | 0.011 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.914 | -0.284 | 0.160 | -5.697 | <0.001 | |
| M2家庭功能-适应度 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.021 | -0.234 | 0.005 | -4.435 | <0.001 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.561 | 0.470 | 1.445 | 11.729 | <0.001 | |
| M2家庭功能-适应度 | 16.951 | -0.174 | 0.143 | -3.931 | <0.001 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.914 | -0.284 | 0.160 | -5.697 | <0.001 | |
| M3家庭功能-合作度 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.025 | -0.259 | 0.005 | -4.956 | <0.001 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.483 | 0.517 | 1.445 | 13.194 | <0.001 | |
| M3家庭功能-合作度 | 17.559 | -0.150 | 0.143 | -3.475 | 0.001 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.914 | -0.284 | 0.160 | -5.697 | <0.001 | |
| M4家庭功能-成长度 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.029 | -0.255 | 0.006 | -4.909 | <0.001 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.474 | 0.537 | 1.093 | 13.831 | <0.001 | |
| M4家庭功能-成长度 | 15.120 | -0.147 | 0.137 | -3.459 | 0.001 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.914 | -0.284 | 0.160 | -5.697 | <0.001 | |
| M5家庭功能-情感度 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.016 | -0.148 | 0.006 | -2.790 | 0.006 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.692 | 0.464 | 1.219 | 11.663 | <0.001 | |
| M5家庭功能-情感度 | 14.221 | -0.215 | 0.141 | -4.915 | <0.001 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.914 | -0.284 | 0.160 | -5.697 | <0.001 | |
| M6家庭功能-亲密度 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.015 | -0.158 | 0.005 | -2.942 | 0.003 | |
| Y家庭抗逆力 | ||||||
| X失能程度 | -0.683 | 0.454 | 1.328 | 11.464 | <0.001 | |
| M6家庭功能-亲密度 | 15.221 | -0.212 | 0.142 | -4.826 | <0.001 | |
| 类型 | 路径 | 效应值 | 95%CI | SE | 相对效应值(%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 总效应 | - | -0.914 | (-1.229,-0.598) | 0.160 | - |
| 直接效应 | (控制家庭功能的影响后)居家失能老年人失能程度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.300 | (-0.532,-0.330) | 0.118 | 32.8 |
| (控制适应度的影响后)居家失能老年人失能程度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.560 | (-0.835,-0.275) | 0.143 | 61.3 | |
| (控制合作度的影响后)居家失能老年人失能程度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.483 | (-0.755,-0.209) | 0.139 | 52.9 | |
| (控制成长度的影响后)居家失能老年人失能程度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.473 | (-0.736,-0.198) | 0.137 | 51.8 | |
| (控制情感度的影响后)居家失能老年人失能程度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.693 | (-0.964,-0.410) | 0.141 | 75.8 | |
| (控制亲密度的影响后)居家失能老年人失能程度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.683 | (-0.956,-0.399) | 0.142 | 74.7 | |
| 中介效应 | 居家失能老年人失能程度→家庭功能→家庭抗逆力 | -0.614 | (-0.930,-0.357) | 0.140 | 67.2 |
| 居家失能老年人失能程度→适应度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.354 | (-0.565,-0.179) | 0.099 | 38.7 | |
| 居家失能老年人失能程度→合作度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.431 | (-0.661,-0.238) | 0.110 | 47.1 | |
| 居家失能老年人失能程度→成长度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.441 | (-0.689,-0.241) | -0.114 | 48.2 | |
| 居家失能老年人失能程度→情感度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.221 | (-0.417,-0.744) | 0.088 | 24.2 | |
| 居家失能老年人失能程度→亲密度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.231 | (-0.416,-0.078) | 0.086 | 25.3 |
Table 5 Mediating effects of family function and its five components between disability severity and family resilience in home-living older adults with disability
| 类型 | 路径 | 效应值 | 95%CI | SE | 相对效应值(%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 总效应 | - | -0.914 | (-1.229,-0.598) | 0.160 | - |
| 直接效应 | (控制家庭功能的影响后)居家失能老年人失能程度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.300 | (-0.532,-0.330) | 0.118 | 32.8 |
| (控制适应度的影响后)居家失能老年人失能程度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.560 | (-0.835,-0.275) | 0.143 | 61.3 | |
| (控制合作度的影响后)居家失能老年人失能程度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.483 | (-0.755,-0.209) | 0.139 | 52.9 | |
| (控制成长度的影响后)居家失能老年人失能程度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.473 | (-0.736,-0.198) | 0.137 | 51.8 | |
| (控制情感度的影响后)居家失能老年人失能程度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.693 | (-0.964,-0.410) | 0.141 | 75.8 | |
| (控制亲密度的影响后)居家失能老年人失能程度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.683 | (-0.956,-0.399) | 0.142 | 74.7 | |
| 中介效应 | 居家失能老年人失能程度→家庭功能→家庭抗逆力 | -0.614 | (-0.930,-0.357) | 0.140 | 67.2 |
| 居家失能老年人失能程度→适应度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.354 | (-0.565,-0.179) | 0.099 | 38.7 | |
| 居家失能老年人失能程度→合作度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.431 | (-0.661,-0.238) | 0.110 | 47.1 | |
| 居家失能老年人失能程度→成长度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.441 | (-0.689,-0.241) | -0.114 | 48.2 | |
| 居家失能老年人失能程度→情感度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.221 | (-0.417,-0.744) | 0.088 | 24.2 | |
| 居家失能老年人失能程度→亲密度→家庭抗逆力 | -0.231 | (-0.416,-0.078) | 0.086 | 25.3 |
| [1] | 李新辉,陈江芸,王奕,等. 新疆农村维吾尔族、哈萨克族老年人社会养老保障制度安排研究:以新疆新源县哈拉布拉乡和库尔勒市哈拉玉宫乡为例[J]. 社会保障研究,2014,7(4):38-43. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1674-4802.2014.04.006. |
| [2] | 吴良平. 新疆人口较少民族人口结构差异及其问题研究:基于第四、五、六次人口普查数据的对比分析[J]. 西北人口,2017,38(2):120-126. DOI:10.15884/j.cnki.issn.1007-0672.2017.02.017. |
| [3] | 王家威,樊琼玲,罗园园,等. 新疆牧区哈萨克族牧民代谢综合征患病率及影响因素研究[J]. 中国全科医学,2020,23(15):1950-1955. DOI:10.12114/j.issn.1007-9572.2020.00.098. |
| [4] | 张雪莲,马依彤,杨毅宁,等. 新疆老年人群高血压患病率、知晓率、治疗和控制状况调查[J]. 中华高血压杂志,2014,22(1):31-35. DOI:10.16439/j.cnki.1673-7245.2014.01.010. |
| [5] | 金艳,张俊仕,陈曦,等. 2003—2015年新疆某三甲医院汉、维吾尔、哈萨克族高血压及合并疾病的调查分析[J]. 新疆医科大学学报,2016,39(3):372-375. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1009-5551.2016.03.028. |
| [6] | 姑力热巴·买买提,甫凤,代亚丽. 新疆南疆社区维吾尔族老年人养老方式选择及社区养老服务需求调查[J]. 护理管理杂志,2015,15(1):21-23. |
| [7] | WU Y T, ALI G C, GUERCHET M,et al. Prevalence of dementia in mainland China,Hong Kong and Taiwan:an updated systematic review and Meta-analysis[J]. Int J Epidemiol,2018,47(3):709-719. DOI:10.1093/ije/dyy007. |
| [8] | BUTSRIPHUM N, GETSUWAN S, PRABPRAM W,et al. Family function in pediatric liver transplant recipients residing in a developing country[J]. Transpl P,2020,52(3):920-925. DOI:10.1016/j.transproceed.2020.01.035. |
| [9] | FACCIO F, GANDINI S, RENZI C,et al. Development and validation of the Family Resilience(FaRE)Questionnaire:an observational study in Italy[J]. BMJ Open,2019,9(6):e024670. DOI:10.1136/bmjopen-2018-024670. |
| [10] | 王美艳,王玉环,陈雪峰,等. 新疆维吾尔族、哈萨克族失能老年人居家照护者照护负担干预效果[J]. 中国卫生事业管理,2016,33(5):384-387. |
| [11] | 内蒙古自治区统计局,内蒙古自治区第七次全国人口普查领导小组办公室. 内蒙古自治区第七次全国人口普查公报(第一号):全区常住人口情况[J]. 内蒙古统计,2021,16(2):61. DOI:10.19454/j.cnki.cn15-1170/c.2021.02.023. |
| [12] | LAWTON M P, BRODY E M. Assessment of older people:self-maintaining and instrumental activities of daily living[J]. Gerontologist,1969,9(3):179-186. DOI:10.1093/geront/9.3Part1.179. |
| [13] | SMILKSTEIN G. The family APGAR:a proposal for a family function test and its use by physicians[J]. J Fam Pract,1978,6(6):1231-1239. |
| [14] | 周佳. 新疆少数民族地区居家失能老年人家庭抗逆力研究[D]. 石河子:石河子大学,2021. |
| [15] | FOLSTEIN M F, FOLSTEIN S E, MCHUGH P R. "Mini-mental state". A practical method for grading the cognitve state of patients for the clinician[J]. J Psychiatr Res,1975,12(3):189-198. DOI:10.1016/0022-3956(75)90026-6. |
| [16] | 张涵,康飞. 基于bootstrap的多重中介效应分析方法[J]. 统计与决策,2016,16(5):75-78. DOI:10.13546/j.cnki.tjyjc.2016.05.019. |
| [17] | 温忠麟,叶宝娟. 中介效应分析:方法和模型发展[J]. 心理科学进展,2014,22(5):731-745. DOI:10.37241SP.J.1042.2014.00731. |
| [18] | 中华人民共和国民政部. 三部门发布第四次中国城乡老年人生活状况抽样调查成果[EB/OL]. (2016-10-13)[2021-01-17]. . |
| [19] | 黄伟. 新疆牧业地区居家失能老年人非正式照护时间成本预测[D]. 石河子:石河子大学,2020. |
| [20] | BENNICH B B, MUNCH L, EGEROD I,et al. Patient assessment of family function,glycemic control and quality of life in adult patients with type 2 diabetes and incipient complications[J]. Can J Diabetes,2019,43(3):193-200. DOI:10.1016/j.jcjd.2018.09.002. |
| [21] | ZHOU Y, HU D, ZHANG K,et al. The mechanism of family adaptability and cohesion in suicidal ideation among Chinese cancer patients[J]. J Psychosoc Oncol,2020,38(5):612-626. DOI:10.1080/07347332.2020.1757799. |
| [22] | RAPPORT L J, WONG C G, HANKS R A. Resilience and well-being after traumatic brain injury[J]. Disabil Rehabil,2020,42(14):2049-2055. DOI:10.1080/09638288.2018.155232. |
| [23] | 成杰,刘萍萍,董立焕,等. 脑损伤患者家庭功能、心理韧性与急性应激障碍[J]. 中国老年学杂志,2018,38(23):5832-5834. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1005-9202.2018.23.077. |
| [24] | 叶明明,张薇,邓锐,等. 首发脑卒中患者照护者的家庭抗逆力水平及其影响因素[J]. 解放军护理杂志,2021,38(5):1-4. DOI:10.3969/j.issn.1008-9993.2021.05.001. |
| [25] | 华红琴,曹炎. 信念、沟通与联结:自闭症儿童家庭抗逆力生成研究[J]. 社会工作,2019,21(3):28-40,110. |
| [26] | KIMURA H, NISHIO M, KUKIHARA H,et al. The role of caregiver burden in the familial functioning,social support,and quality of family life of family caregivers of elders with dementia[J]. J Rural Med,2019,14(2):156-164. DOI:10.2185/jrm.2999. |
| [27] | KIM J, KIM H, PARK S,et al. Mediating effects of family functioning on the relationship between care burden and family quality of life of caregivers of children with intellectual disabilities in Mongolia[J]. J Appl Res Intellect,2020,49(3):53-65. |
| [28] | 马文娟,王玉环,黄伟,等. 新疆牧业地区失能老年人居家非正式照护时间分析[J]. 中国卫生事业管理,2019,36(4):297-299. |
| [29] | 阿比古丽·尼亚孜,苏航. 喀什老城维吾尔族传统民居空间结构的社会文化分析[J]. 云南民族大学学报(哲学社会科学版),2017,34(3):57-64. |
| [1] | BAO Ruolin, LU Chao, FENG Xin, YE Chunmei, LAI Fenhua, NI Zuowei, YANG Dongbo, ZHENG Yongtao. Predictive Model for Breakthrough Influenza Cases in the Elderly Population: a Nested Case-control Study [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(19): 2671-2677. |
| [2] | YU Shan, CHE Yajie, SUBIYINUER· Maimaiti, GUO Kaiyang, FENG Xingxing, YAN Ping. A Comparative Study on the Current Situation and Influencing Factors of Subjective Cognitive Decline among Urban and Rural Elderly People in Xinjiang [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(16): 2227-2233. |
| [3] | LI Jiali, LIU Fan, KE Lixin, LI Huijuan, WANG Haibo, ZHAO Xiaoxiao, ZHAO Xinke, LU Cuncun. Disease Burden of Obesity among Individuals Aged 60 and above Globally and in China from 1990 to 2021: Trend Analysis and Model-based Projection [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(15): 2067-2076. |
| [4] | ZOU Jian, LI Wanping, GE Handa, JIN Zhe, RUFEINA· Tuerxun, LI Juan, WEI Anhua, FENG Da. Study on Potentially Inappropriate Medication Use among the Community Elderly Patients in Hubei Province [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(13): 1759-1765. |
| [5] | YANG Juan, LIU Shan, LI Fei, MENG Haodong, QIAO Hui, XIE Yongxin. Dynamic Monitoring and Analysis of Influencing Factors of Health Shocks in Rural Middle Aged and Elderly People in Ningxia: Empirical Research Based on 14 Years and Four Periods of Follow-up Data before and after Poverty Alleviation [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(07): 914-921. |
| [6] | YOU Shuping, AIFEIRE Abeibao, MENG Na, SONG Xiaowei, WU Pei, LIU Qin, YUAN Yuan. Research on the Health Poverty Vulnerability Evaluation System for Elderly Chronic Disease Patients in Agricultural and Pastoral Areas of Xinjiang [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(04): 518-524. |
| [7] | HU Zhetao, PAN Xiaoyi. A Quantitative Research on Effectiveness of China's Community-dwelling Integrated Medical and Elderly Care Policy from the Perspective of Health Service Continuity [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2026, 29(01): 42-49. |
| [8] | YU Xinyan, YANG Jianyun, JIANG Qingru, CHEN Tao, SU Peng, WANG Siyang, LUO Zhanwu, ZHANG Haicheng. Study on the Correlation between the Course of Hypertension and Autonomic Nervous System Damage in Elderly Patients in Primary Care Institutions in Ningxia Hui Autonomous Region Based on Single Lead Wearable Electrocardiogram Device [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(34): 4359-4370. |
| [9] | Expert Panel of the National Key R&D Program "Research on the Effects and Mechanisms of Multiple Types of Physical Stimulation on Body Function", Brain Function Detection and Regulation Rehabilitation Professional Committee of Chinese Association of Rehabilitation Medicine, Cerebral Small Vessel Disease Professional Committee of Beijing Neurology Association. Expert Consensus on the Effects and Efficacy Evaluation of Non-invasive Neuromodulation in Elders with Disability and Dementia [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(34): 4258-4281. |
| [10] | ZHANG Yongqing, LI Na, GAO Yili, QIN Jiawen, YU Haiping, SHI Hui. Analysis on the Trend of Disease Burden of Hearing Loss in Middle-aged and Elderly People in China from 1990 to 2021 [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(33): 4227-4233. |
| [11] | CHEN Huilong, LIAO Yunchu, LIU Yuwei, KONG Zhenghui, HUANG Xinghui, XU Jiahui, QI Na, WANG Yuanping, LIANG Wenjian. Association between Relative Fat Mass and Cardiovascular Disease in Middle-aged and Elderly Population: a Cross-sectional and Longitudinal Study Based on CHARLS [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(32): 4047-4054. |
| [12] | SHI Xiaojie, YANG Xiaohua, MA Chunfang, TANG Rong. Influence of Multiple Chronic Conditions on Health Impairment in Middle-aged and Elderly People [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(32): 4009-4014. |
| [13] | LUO Qi, CHEN Xiaolei, ZHAO Linlin, DU Juan, SHAO Shuang. Systematic Evaluation of Social Capital Assessment Tools for Elderly Based on COSMIN Guidelines [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(31): 3974-3980. |
| [14] | LI Ling, LI Yaping, QIAN Shixing, NIE Jing, LU Chunhua, LI Xia. Research on Influencing Factors and Risk Prediction of Cognitive Function in Community-dwelling Middle-aged and Elderly People [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(30): 3773-3778. |
| [15] | TANG Ling, ZHANG Guoliang, LI Zhenkun, SI Shengbo, LIU Qiang, CHEN Ren, REN Bailing. The Utilization and Influencing Factors of Health Services for Middle Aged and Elderly Chronic Disease Patients [J]. Chinese General Practice, 2025, 28(29): 3688-3693. |
| Viewed | ||||||
|
Full text |
|
|||||
|
Abstract |
|
|||||