Volume 10, Issue 3 (Summer 2022)
Iran J Health Sci 2022, 10(3): 13-23 |
Back to browse issues page
Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:
POLAT T, ÇETİNKAYA F. Determining the Quality of Life, Social and Emotional Loneliness of Physically Disabled Individuals. Iran J Health Sci 2022; 10 (3) :13-23
URL: http://jhs.mazums.ac.ir/article-1-807-en.html
URL: http://jhs.mazums.ac.ir/article-1-807-en.html
Assistant Professor, Vocation School of Health Services, Erzincan Binali Yıldırım University, Erzincan, Turkey , tuncapolat04@gmail.com
Abstract: (1810 Views)
Background and purpose: This study aimed to examine the relationship between the life quality of physically disabled individuals and their social and emotional loneliness.
Materials and Methods: This study was a cross-sectional type of research in which "Physically Handicapped Life Quality Measurement Tool (WHOQOL-DIS)" was used to determine the quality of life, and "Social and Emotional Loneliness Scale (SELSA)" and “Personal Information Form" were also used to examine the levels of loneliness. The data were collected through face-to-face interviews with 316 people. Pearson Correlation and Multiple Linear Regression analysis were also used to test the relationship between quality of life and loneliness.
Results: 33.3% of the study group was in the age range of 40-49 and their average age was 41.90 ± 12.86 years. A significant relationship (p<0.05) was documented between the WHOQOL-DIS sub-dimensions and the social and emotional loneliness sub-dimensions. There was also found a weak negative relationship between physical domain and social loneliness, a very weak negative relationship between emotional loneliness and family relationships, a weak negative relationship between the mental domain and social loneliness and loneliness in family relationships, and a very weak relationship in the negative direction with emotional loneliness. It was determined that there was a weak negative relationship between social domain and social loneliness, emotional loneliness and loneliness in family relationships. There was also a weak negative relationship between the environmental domain and social loneliness, emotional loneliness and loneliness in family relationships. The results also showed a moderate negative relationship between the quality of life module and social loneliness, and a weak relationship in the negative direction between emotional loneliness and family relationships.
Conclusion: A significant relationship was found between the sub-dimensions of the quality of life scale and the sub-dimensions of the loneliness scale. Also, loneliness was found to be a significant predictor of the quality of life. Any increase in the feeling of loneliness in the lives of disabled people was observed to reduce their quality of life.
Materials and Methods: This study was a cross-sectional type of research in which "Physically Handicapped Life Quality Measurement Tool (WHOQOL-DIS)" was used to determine the quality of life, and "Social and Emotional Loneliness Scale (SELSA)" and “Personal Information Form" were also used to examine the levels of loneliness. The data were collected through face-to-face interviews with 316 people. Pearson Correlation and Multiple Linear Regression analysis were also used to test the relationship between quality of life and loneliness.
Results: 33.3% of the study group was in the age range of 40-49 and their average age was 41.90 ± 12.86 years. A significant relationship (p<0.05) was documented between the WHOQOL-DIS sub-dimensions and the social and emotional loneliness sub-dimensions. There was also found a weak negative relationship between physical domain and social loneliness, a very weak negative relationship between emotional loneliness and family relationships, a weak negative relationship between the mental domain and social loneliness and loneliness in family relationships, and a very weak relationship in the negative direction with emotional loneliness. It was determined that there was a weak negative relationship between social domain and social loneliness, emotional loneliness and loneliness in family relationships. There was also a weak negative relationship between the environmental domain and social loneliness, emotional loneliness and loneliness in family relationships. The results also showed a moderate negative relationship between the quality of life module and social loneliness, and a weak relationship in the negative direction between emotional loneliness and family relationships.
Conclusion: A significant relationship was found between the sub-dimensions of the quality of life scale and the sub-dimensions of the loneliness scale. Also, loneliness was found to be a significant predictor of the quality of life. Any increase in the feeling of loneliness in the lives of disabled people was observed to reduce their quality of life.
Type of Study: Original Article |
Subject:
Community Health
References
1. WHO. https://www.who.int/ disabilities/ world_report/2011/report/en/ Accessed July 20, 2019.
2. TÜİK. http://www.tuik.gov.tr/PreTablo. do?alt_id=1068 Accessed July 25, 2019.
3. İnan S, Ceyhun Peker G, Tekiner S, Ak D, Dağlı Z. A Glance at Disability, the Situation of Disabled People and Provision of Health Care in Turkey. TAF Preventive Medicine Bulletin. 2013; 12(6):723-728. [DOI:10.5455/pmb.1-1353872064]
4. T.C. Başbakanlık Özürlüler idaresi Başkanlığı. Ortopedik özürlüler, Başbakanlık özürlüler idaresi başkanlığı yayınları, Mattek Matbaacılık, Ankara; 2008;10-32.
5. Uskun E. Akraba evlilikleri. STED, 2001; 10(2).http://www.ttb.org.tr/STED/sted0201/4.html Accessed July 21, 2019.
6. Christiansen C.H, Matuska KM. Lifestyle balance: A review of concepts and research. Journal of Occupational Science, 2006; 13(1):49-61. [DOI:10.1080/14427591.2006.9686570]
7. Salvador-Carulla L, Lucas R, Ayuso-Mateos J L, Miret M. Use of the terms" Wellbeing" and" Quality of Life" in health sciences: a conceptual framework. The European Journal of Psychiatry, 2014;28(1):50-65. [DOI:10.4321/S0213-61632014000100005]
8. Cummins RA. Moving from the quality of life concept to a theory. JIDR, 2005;49(10):699-706. [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2788.2005.00738.x] [PMID]
9. Karimi M, Brazier J. Health, health-related quality of life, and quality of life: what is the difference? Pharmacoeconomics, 2016;34(7):645-649. [DOI:10.1007/s40273-016-0389-9] [PMID]
10. Kaplan R M, Ries AL. Quality of life: concept and definition. COPD: Journal of Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, 2007;4(3):263-271. [DOI:10.1080/15412550701480356] [PMID]
11. Erbaydar Paksoy N. Yasam ve Engellilik, Engelli Dostu Belediye Sempozyumu, 2008;27 Mayıs Ankara.
12. Altay B, Çavuşoğlu F, Çal, A. The factors affecting the perception of elderly patients towards health, quality of life and health-related quality of life. TAF Preventive Medicine Bulletin. 2016;15(3):181-189. [DOI:10.5455/pmb.1-1438765038]
13. Özerdoğan Ö, Yüksel B, Çelik M, Oymak S, Bakar Ç. Associated factors affecting the quality of life of the elderly. Turkish Journal of Public Health. 2018; 16(2):90-105. [DOI:10.20518/tjph.458209]
14. Edisan Z, Kadıoğlu FG. Sağlıkla ilgili yasam kalitesi ölçekleri: etik açıdan bir değerlendirme. Türkiye Klinikleri J Med Ethics, 2011; 19(1):8-15.
15. Öztabak MÜ. Investigation of Life Expectations of Disabled Persons. FSM Scholarly Studies Journal of Humanities and Social Sciences. 2017; 9:355-375. [DOI:10.16947/fsmia.323388]
16. Yanguas J, Pinazo-Henandis S, Tarazona-Santabalbina FJ. The complexity of loneliness. Acta Bio Medica: Atenei Parmensis, 2018; 89(2):302.
17. Rokach, A. The effect of gender and culture on loneliness: A mini review. Emerging Science Journal, 2018; 2(2):59-64. [DOI:10.28991/esj-2018-01128]
18. Tzouvara V, Papadopoulos C, Randhawa G. A narrative review of the theoretical foundations of loneliness. British Journal of Community Nursing, 2015; 20(7):329-334. [DOI:10.12968/bjcn.2015.20.7.329] [PMID]
19. Öz F. Sağlık Alanında Temel Kavramlar (II. Baskı), Mattek Matbaacılık, Ankara; 2010. P.150-154.
20. Rokach A, Lechcier-Kimel R, Safarov A Loneliness of people with physical disabilities. Social Behavior and Personality: an international journal, 2006; 34(6):681-700. [DOI:10.2224/sbp.2006.34.6.681]
21. Faruk A.Y, Akkaya D, Başıbüyük GÖ. Yaşam kalitesinin yalnızlık üzerindeki etkisi: antalya 60+ tazelenme üniversitesi örneği. Cumhuriyet Üniversitesi Edebiyat Fakültesi Sosyal Bilimler Dergisi, 2019; 43(2):193-210.
22. Erturan İ, Aktepe E, Kocaman O, Sönmez Y, Başak P.Y, Ceyhan A.M, Akkaya V.B. Evaluation of acne quality of life, loneliness and life satisfaction levels in adolescents with acne vulgaris. 2014; 48(4):172-176. [DOI:10.4274/turkderm.02779]
23. Eser E, Fidaner H, Fidaner C, Eser SY, Elbi H, Göker E. Whoqol-100 ve whoqolbref'in psikometrik özellikleri. 3P Dergisi, 1999; 7(2):23-60.
24. Çeçen AR. The Turkish short version of the social and emotional loneliness scale for adults: ınitial development and validation. Social Behavior And Personality, 2007; 35(6):717-734. [DOI:10.2224/sbp.2007.35.6.717]
25. Özdamar K. Statistical Data Analysis with Package Programs 1; 2002.
26. Arpacı F, Gürbüz S. Assessment of Quality Of Life of the Elderly People by Cities. Üçüncü Sektör Sosyal Ekonomi, 2012; 47(2):47-64.
27. Demir A. The sociological role of home-care services in the relationship between the disabled and the family. 2019; 6(44):3395-3405.
28. Ay F, Akkaya D, Başıbüyük GÖ. The effect of life quality on loneliness: example of antalya 60+ Tazelenme University. Sivas Cumhuriyet University Faculty of Letters Journal of Social Sciences. 2019; 43(2):193-210.
29. Vuletić G, Stapić M. Quality of life and loneliness among elderly people. Klinicka Psihologija, 2013; 6(1-2):45-61.
30. Şentürk U. Bedensel engelli 13-18 yaş amputelerin yaşam kalitelerinin ve serbest zaman alışkanlıklarının incelenmesi, Yüksek Lisans Tezi, İstanbul Gelişim Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü. İstanbul; 2017.
31. Burholt V, Windle G, Morgan DJ. A Social model of loneliness: the roles of disability, social resources, and cognitive ımpairment. The Gerontologist, 2017; 57(6):1020-1030.
32. Kılınç AS. Burdur'da 65 Yaş ve Nüfus Yaşam Kalitesi ve Yalnızlık Durumu İlişkili Etmenler, Doktora Tezi, Başkent Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü. Ankara; 2019.
33. Yıldız M, Kılıç ME. Investigation within the framework of some socio-demographic characteristics of loneliness and social integrity levels among individuals who lived in orphanage. International Journal of Human Studies. 2018; 1(2):296-312.
34. Tonak HA, Kitiş A. The Investigation of Activity Level, Leisure and Community Participation in Disabled Workers with Upper Extremity Problem. Journal of Occupational Therapy and Rehabilitation. 2014;2(3):113-119.
35. Fougeyrollas P, Cloutier R, Bergeron H, Côté J, St Michel G. The quebec classification: disability creation process. Quebec: International Network on the Disability Creation Process; Canadian Society for the International Classification of Impairments, Disabilities and Handicaps.; 1998.
36. Akyürek G. Engelli kişilerin toplumsal katılımlarını etkileyen faktörlerin incelenmesi. Yüksek Lisans Tezi, Hacettepe Üniversitesi, Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü, Ankara; 2011. 130s.
37. Gürsoy F, Aydoğdu F, Aysu B. Children with Special Needs and Family Education. Development and Educatıon Studies. 1st, İstanbul, Hiperyayın; 2020. p. 75
Send email to the article author
| Rights and permissions | |
 |
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 International License. |
This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC-By-NC), which permits use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited and is not used for commercial purposes.
Contact Information
