Gülseren Dağlar, Naim Nur, Dilek BİLGİÇ, Semiha Aydın Özkan

Gebelerin stresle başa çıkma tarzları ile yaşam kalitesi arasındaki ilişki

Amaç: Bu çalışmada gebelerin stresle başa çıkma tarzları ile yaşam kalitesi arasındaki ilişkiyi belirlemek amaçlanmıştır.Gereç ve Yöntem: Kesitsel tipte planlanan araştırmanın evrenini Sivas İl Merkezinde yaşayan gebeler oluşturmuştur. Araştırma, 1 Aralık 2015 -1 Mart 2016 tarihleri arasında Sivas Merkezde bulunan 6 Aile Sağlığı Merkezi’nde yapılmış, örneklemi 242 gebe oluşturmuştur. Veriler Kişisel Bilgi Formu, Stresle Başa Çıkma Tarzları Ölçeği ve Dünya Sağlık Örgütü Yaşam Kalitesi Ölçeği ile toplanmıştır. Bulgular: Gebelerin kendine güvenli ve iyimser yaklaşım puanı ile fiziksel, psikolojik, sosyal ve çevresel alan yaşam kalitesi puanı arasında pozitif yönde ve zayıf büyüklükte istatistiksel anlamlı ilişki bulunmuştur. Çaresiz yaklaşım ve boyun eğici yaklaşım puanı ile psikolojik, sosyal ve çevresel alan yaşam kalitesi puanı arasında negatif yönde zayıf büyüklükte istatistiksel anlamlı ilişki saptanmıştır. Ayrıca sosyal destek arama davranışı ile sosyal ve çevresel alan yaşam kalitesi puanı arasında pozitif yönde ve zayıf büyüklükte istatistiksel anlamlı ilişki belirlenmiştir.Sonuç: Stresle başa çıkmada kendine güvenli ve iyimser yaklaşım kullanan gebelerin yaşam kalitesinin tüm alanları ve sosyal destek arama davranışında sosyal ve çevresel alan yaşam kalitesi olumlu etkilenirken, çaresiz ve boyun eğici yaklaşımda psikolojik, sosyal ve çevresel alan yaşam kalitesi olumsuz etkilenmektedir. Gebelerin stres yönetimi becerilerinin geliştirilmesi önerilmektedir.

Anahtar Kelimeler:

Üçüncü trimester, gebe, stresle başa çıkma tarzı

Relationship between coping with stress styles and quality of life of pregnant women

Purpose: The research was conducted to determine the relationship between coping with stress styles and quality of life of pregnant women.Materials and Methods: The population of this cross-sectional study consisted of pregnant women living in Sivas city center. The research was carried out in 6 Family Health Centers in the center of Sivas from 1 December 2015 to 1 March 2016. The sample consisted of 242 pregnant women. Data were collected by Personal Information Form, Styles of Coping with Stress Scale and World Health Organization Quality of Life Scale.Results: A weak statistically significant positive relationship was found between self-confident and optimistic approach scores of the pregnant women and their physical, psychological, social and environmental quality of life scores. There was a weak statistically significant negative relationship between approaches of helpless and submissive scores and psychological, social and environmental quality of life scores. In addition, there was a weak statistically significant relationship between social support searching approach and social and environmental quality of life scores. Conclusion: While social and environmental quality of life is positively affected in all areas of quality of life and in social support searching approach of pregnant women who use self-confident and optimistic approach in coping with stress, psychological, social and environmental quality of life is negatively affected in approaches of helpless and submissive. Pregnant women are recommended to improve their stress management skills.

Keywords:

Pregnancy, stress coping style, quality of life,

PDF

___

1. Beydağ DK. Doğum sonu dönemde anneliğe uyum ve hemşirenin rolü. TSK Koruyucu Hekimlik Bülteni. 2007;6:479-84.
2. Staneva A, Bogossian F, Pritchard M, Wittkowski A. The effects of maternal depression, anxiety and perceived stress during pregnancy on preterm birth: A systematic review. Women Birth. 2015;28:179–93.
3. Loomans EM, Van Dijk AE, Vrijkotte TG, Van Eijsden M, Stronks K, Gemke RJ et al. Psychosocial stress during pregnancy is related to adverse birth outcomes: Results from a large multiethnic community-based birth cohort. Eur J Public Health. 2013;23:485–91.
4. Huizink AC, de Medina PG, Mulder EJ, Visser GH, Buitelaar JK. Coping in normal pregnancy. Ann Behav Med. 2002;24:132-40.
5. Rohit VK, Makwana SM. Lifestyle: A comparative study of the arts and science college students. International Journal of Indian Psychology. 2015;2:2349–3429.
6. Bie´n A, Rzo´nca E, Ka´nczugowska A, IwanowiczPalus G. Factors affecting the quality of life and the illness acceptance of pregnant women with diabetes. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2015;13:68.
7. Ryff CD. Psychological well-being revisited: advances in the science and practice of eudaimonia. Psychother Psychosom. 2014;83:10–28.
8. The WHOQOL Group. What Quality of Life. World Health Forum. 1996;17:354-56.
9. Altıparmak S, Yanıkkerem E, Karadeniz G. Gebelerde sosyodemografik özellikler, gebelik sorunları ile yaşam kalitesi ilişkisi. Klinik Bilimler&Doktor. 2005;11:536- 42.
10. Mete S. Stres, hormonlar ve doğum arasındaki ilişki. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi Hemşirelik Yüksekokulu Elektronik Dergisi. 2013;6:93-8.
11. Şahin HN, Durak A. Stresle başa çıkma tarzları ölçeği; üniversite öğrencileri için uyarlanması. Türk Psikoloji Dergisi. 1995;10:56-73.
12. Eser E, Fidaner H, Fidaner, C, Eser SY, Eser E, Göker E. Psychometric properties of the WHOQOL1OO and WHOQOL-BREF. Psychiatry Psychology Psychopharmacology Journal. 1999;7:23–40.
13. Valsamakis G, Chrousos G, Mastorakos G. Stress, female reproduction and pregnancy. Psychoneuroendocrinology 100. 2019;48–57.
14. Dağlar G, Nur N. Gebelerin stresle başa çıkma tarzlarının anksiyete ve depresyon düzeyi ile ilişkisi. Cumhuriyet Tıp Derg. 2014;36:429-41.
15. Yılmaz DS, Beji KN. Gebelerin stresle başa çıkma, depresyon ve prenatal bağlanma düzeyleri ve bunları etkileyen faktörler. Genel Tıp Dergisi. 2010;20:99- 108.
16. Loh J, Harms C, Harman B. Effects of parental stress, optimism, and health-promoting behaviors on the quality of life of primiparous and multiparous mothers. Nurs Res. 2017;66:231–39.
17. Altıparmak S, Gebelerde sosyodemoğrafik özellikler, özbakım gücü ve yaşam kalitesi ilişkisi. TAF Preventive Medicine Bulletin. 2006;5:416-23.
18. Kluwer ES, Johnson MD. Conflict frequency and relationship quality across the transition to parenthood. J Marriage Fam. 2007;69:1089–106.
19. Nomaguchi KM, Milkie MA. Costs and rewards of children: The effects of becoming a parent on adults' lives. J Marriage Fam. 2003;65:356–74.
20. Skreden M, Skari H, Malt UF, Pripp AH, Björk MD, Faugli A et al. Parenting stress and emotional wellbeing in mothers and fathers of preschool children. Scand J Public Health. 2012;40:596–604.
21. Lau Y, Yin L. Maternal, obstetric variables, perceived stress and health-related quality of life among pregnant women in Macao, China. Midwifery. 2011;27:668-73.
22. Lau Y, Tha PH, Wong DFK, Wang Y, Wang Y, Yobas PK. Different perceptions of stress, coping styles, and general well-being among pregnant Chinese women: a structural equation modeling approach. Arch Womens Ment Health. 2016;19:71–8.
23. Scheier MF, Carver CS. Effects of optimism, psychological and physical well-being: Theoretical overview and empirical update. Cognit Ther Res. 1992;16:201–28.
24. Brissette I, Scheier MF, Carver CS. The role of optimism in social network development, coping, and psychological adjustment during a life transition. J Pers Soc Psychol. 2002;82:102–11.
25. Taylor SE, Stanton AL. Coping resources, coping processes, and mental health. Annu Rev Clin Psychol. 2007;3:377–401.
26. Park CL, Moore PJ, Turner RA, Adler NE. The roles of constructive thinking and optimismin psychological and behavioral adjustment during pregnancy. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1997;73:584–92.
27. Dolatiyan M, Mirab Zade A, Frozan AS, Sajadi H, Alavi Mahd H, Moafi F et al. Correlation between selfesteem and perceived stress in pregnancy and cophng strategies with it. Journal of Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. 2013;18:148-55.
28. American Psychological Association. Report of the APA Task Force on Socioeconomic Status. Washington, DC, American Psychological Association, 2007.
29. Bakhshayesh AR, Kazeraninejad M, Mongabadi MD, Raghebian M. A comparison of general health and coping strategies in fertile and infertile women in Yazd. Iran J Reprod Med. 2012;10:601.
30. Guardino CM, Schetter CD, Coping during pregnancy: a systematic review and recommendations. Health Psychol Rev. 2014;8:70–94.
31. Hamilton JG, Lobel M. Types, patterns, and predictors of coping with stress during pregnancy: Examination of the revised prenatal coping ınventory in a diverse sample. J Psychosom Obstet Gynecol. 2008;29:97–104.
32. Brummett BH, Mark DB, Siegler IC, Williams RB, Babyak MA, Clapp-Channing NE et al. Perceived social support as a predictor of mortality in coronary patients: effects of smoking, sedentary behavior and depressive symptoms. Psychosom Med. 2005;67:40-5.
33. Elsenbruch S, Benson S, Rucke M, Rose M, Dudenhausen J, Pincus- Knackstedt MK, et al. Social support during pregnancy: effects on maternal depressive symptoms, smoking and pregnancy outcome. Hum Reprod. 2007;22:869-77.
34. Gabbe SG, Niebyl JR, Galan HL, Jauniaux ERM, Landon MB, Simpson JL et al. Obstetrics: Normal and Problem Pregnancies. New York, Elsevier Health Sciences, 2012.
35. Kazemi F, Nahidi F, Kariman N. Exploring factors behind pregnant women’s quality of life in Iran: a qualitative study. Electron Physician. 2017;9:5991- 6001.
36. Abbaszadeh F, Baghery A, Mehran N. Quality of life among pregnant women. Hayat. 2009;15:41-8.
37. Alipour F, Sajjadi H, Foruzan A, Nabavi H, Khedmati E. The role of social supports in reducing anxiety and depression in the elderly. The Elderly. 2009;4(11).
38. Shishehgar S, Dolatian M, Bakhtiari M, Alavi Majd H. A survey of relationship between social support with quality of life as well as stress among pregnant women referred to Shahryar hospital affiliated to social security organization in 1391. Journal of School of Nursing and Midwifery Shahid Beheshti University of Medical Sciences. 2013;23:27-32.
39. Shishehgar S, Mahmoodi A, Dolatian M, Mahmoodi Z, Bakhtiary M, Alavi Majd H. The relationship of social support and quality of life with the level of stress in pregnant women using the PATH model. Iran Red Cres Med J. 2013;15:560–6