肢体残疾人生命意义感、意向性自我调节及心理健康状况的调查分析

Investigation and Analysis of Life Meaning, Mental Health and Intentionality Self-Regulation of Physical Disabled Persons

摘要: 目的：调查分析肢体残疾人生命意义感、意向性自我调节和心理健康的总体状况。方法：方便取样，采用生活目的测验量表(PIL)、意向性自我调节问卷(SRQ)和症状自评量表(SCL-90)对广东省广州、深圳、东莞三市985名肢体残疾人进行问卷施测，回收有效问卷941份，有效率为95.5%。结果：(1) 肢体残疾人组的生命意义感量表总分及各因子分和意向性自我调节问卷总分及各因子分均显著低于正常对照组(p < 0.001, p < 0.05)，SCL-90总分及各因子分均显著高于对照组(p < 0.001)。(2) 独生组生命意义感量表和意向性自我调节问卷总分及各维度得分均显著高于非独生组(p < 0.05, p < 0.01)，SCL-90总均分显著低于非独生组(p < 0.05)。(3) 在生命意义感和意向性自我调节总分及各维度得分上，先天残疾组的得分均显著低于后天残疾组(p < 0.01, p < 0.05)；在SCL-90总分上，先天残疾组的得分显著高于后天残疾组(p < 0.01)。(4) 31~40岁组的SCL-90总分显著高于41~50岁组(p < 0.001)；在生命意义感和意向性自我调节总分上，31~40岁组得分显著低于41~50岁组(p < 0.001)。(5) 肢体残疾人生命意义感量表、意向性自我调节问卷总分及各维度得分、SCL-90总分均呈现残疾级别组间差异，且其差异具有统计学意义(p < 0.01, p < 0.05)，在生命意义感量表总均分上，一级残疾组显著低于其他残疾级别组；在意向性自我调节总均分上，一级和二级残疾组低于三级和四级残疾组，一级和二级残疾组的SCL-90总均分显著高于三级和四级残疾组。(6) 意向性自我调节高分组的生命意义感量表总分及各分维度得分高于低分组(p < 0.001)，SCL-90总均分及各维度得分均低于低分组(p < 0.001)。结论：(1) 肢体残疾人生命意义感程度、意向性自我调节及心理健康水平低于健康正常人。(2) 30~40岁年龄段肢体残疾人士、先天肢体残疾人士、一级和二级残疾的肢体残疾人士生命意义感程度偏低、意向性自我调节水平偏低，心理健康水平偏低，在促进肢体残疾人心理康复工作中有必要重点关注30-40岁年龄段肢体残疾人士、先天肢体残疾人士、一级和二级残疾的肢体残疾人士。(3) 高意向性自我调节肢体残疾人较低意向性自我调节肢体残疾人的生命意义感程度、心理健康水平更高。在肢体残疾人士心理康复工作中有必要纳入意向性自我调节训练计划。

Abstract: Objective: To investigate and analyze the overall status of sense of life meaning, mental health and intentionality self-regulation of the physically disabled. Methods: Symptom Self-rating Scale (SCL-90), Purpose-in-life Test (PIL) and Intentionality Self-Regulation Questionnaire (ISRQ) were used to test 985 persons with physical disabilities in Guangzhou, Shenzhen and Dongguan of Guangdong Province. 941 valid questionnaires were collected, with the effective rate of 95.5%. Results: The total score and all factor scores of SCL-90 in the disabled group were higher than those in the control group, and the total score of PIL, all the factor score and the total score of ISRQ, all the factor score were lower than those in the control group (p < 0.001, p < 0.05). The total score of SCL-90 in the only-child group was significantly lower than that in the non-only-child group (p < 0.05), and the total score of PIL, ISRQ and scores of all dimensions in the only-child group were significantly higher than those in the non-only-child group (p < 0.05 or p < 0.01). The scores of congenital disability group were significantly lower than those of acquired disability group (p < 0.01, p < 0.05) in the total score of PIL, ISRQ and scores of each dimension. In the total score of SCL-90, the score of congenital disability group was significantly higher than that of acquired disability group (p < 0.01). The scores of SCL-90, PIL and ISRQ of the physical disabled were different among different disability types, grades and years, and the differences were statistically significant (p < 0.001). The scores of SCL-90 in the high-intentionality self-regulation group were lower than those in the low-intentionality self-regulation group, and the scores of PIL were higher than those in the low-intentionality self-regulation group (p < 0.001). Conclusion: Compared with the normal group, physical disabled people have lower mental health level, degree of sense of life meaning, and level of intentionality self-regulation. Physically disabled people with stronger intentionality self-regulation have a stronger sense of life meaning and a higher level of mental health.