| 642 | 22 | 41 |
| 下载次数 | 被引频次 | 阅读次数 |
目的探索陕西省青少年系统家庭动力与其心理健康状况的相关性,为改善不良家庭环境、提高青少年心理健康水平提供参考依据。方法于2014年8月—2015年5月,利用一般资料调查表、系统家庭动力自评量表及心理健康症状自评量表(SCL-90),对随机抽取的陕西省5 188名在校青少年进行调查。结果陕西省青少年系统家庭动力总分为(2.50±0.43)分,各维度平均得分最高的是系统逻辑(2.75±0.68)分,最低的是家庭气氛(2.22±0.62)分。青少年心理健康总分为(1.52±0.51)分,各维度平均得分最高的是强迫症(1.71±0.61)分,最低的是躯体化(1.43±0.52)分。不同性别、户籍、家庭收入、学历阶段、家庭人口数、父母亲文化程度、父母亲职业类型青少年家庭动力量表评分及SCL-90量表评分间差异均有统计学意义(均P<0.05)。多元逐步回归分析显示,在控制了人口学特征后,家庭氛围、个性化与心理健康各维度得分及总分均存在正相关;系统逻辑与除强迫症状、抑郁、敌对外的6个维度得分及总分间存在正相关;而疾病观念与心理健康的总分及各因子得分均呈负相关关系。结论陕西省青少年系统家庭动力与青少年心理健康密切相关。
Abstract：Objective To investigate the association of systemic family dynamics with mental health among adolescents in Shaanxi province and to provide references for improving family environment and promoting mental health in the adolescents. Methods Using stratified multistage cluster sampling, we conducted a self-administered questionnaire survey among 5 188 urban and rural students aged 12-23 years in 7 high schools and 2 universities in Shaanxi province from August 2014 to May 2015. A general information questionnaire, Self-Rating Scale of Systemic Family Dynamics(SSFD),and Symptom Checklist-90(SCL-90) were adopted in the study. Results For all the participants, the average overall SSFD score was 2.50 ± 0.43 and the highest and the lowest mean dimension score were 2.75 ± 0.68 for systemic logic and 2.22 士0.62 for family atmosphere; the overall average score of SCL-90 was 1.52 ± 0.51 and the highest and the lowest mean dimension score were 1.71 ± 0.61 for obsessive compulsive and 1.43 ± 0.52 for somatization. Both the SSFD and SCL-90 score of the participants differed significantly by gender, census register, family income, education stage, the number of family members, parental education level, and parental occupation(P < 0.05 for all). Multivariate stepwise regression analysis demonstrated that after controlling demographic variables, family atmosphere and individuation were positively correlated with the overall score and all dimension scores of SCL-90; systemic logic was positively correlated with all dimension scores of SCL-90 except for obsessive-compulsive disorder, depression, and hostility; while the concept of disease was inversely correlated with the overall score and all dimension scores of SCL-90. Conclusion Family systemic family dynamics is closely correlated with mental health among adolescent students.
[1]管同康,陈伟.中学生心理健康影响因素分析与教育方法讨论[J].江苏卫生事业管理,2016, 27(1):153-154.
[2]李莎莎,陈一心,詹明心,等.家庭动力学理论、评定与应用[J].中国心理卫生杂志,2012,26(4):262-266.
[3]张文,许金珂,米国琳,等.山东省某城区初中生心理健康与家庭功能调查研究[J].精神医学杂志,2016,29(2):93-97.
[4]曾伟楠,赵旭东,万崇华,等.家庭动力在家庭社会经济地位与子女心理健康关系中的作用[J].中国卫生事业管理,2017, 34(10):784-787.
[5]厉海英.青少年心理问题分析及对策[J].课程教育研究(学法教法研究),2018,5(4):225.
[6]杨琪,周晓琴,岳云玲,等.青少年抑郁症相关社会心理因素分析[J].安徽医学,2013,34(12):1746-1748.
[7]于磊,赵旭东,万崇华,等.广东省大中学生心理健康与家庭动力关系的典型相关分析[J].中国卫生统计,2015, 32(2):251-253.
[8]姚静,杨昆,周为,等.结构式家庭治疗对青少年抑郁症的疗效研究[J].西部医学,2012,24(9):1691-1693.
[9]李惠,赵旭东,陈增堂,等.家庭动力与大学新生适应的关系[J].中国心理卫生杂志,2009, 23(2):133-137.
[10] Zhang J, Zhang X. Chinese college students'SCL-90 scores and their relations to the college performance[J]. Asian Journal of Psychiatry, 2013, 6(2):134.
[11]何健,孙经,李凤娟,等.河南省住校中学生心理健康现况分析[J].中国公共卫生,2017, 33(3):437-440.
[12]雷榕,锁媛,李彩娜.家庭学校环境、人格与青少年心理健康[J].中国临床心理学杂志,2011,19(5):687-689.
[13]刘爱敏.湖南科技学院大学生抑郁症状及其影响因素分析[J].卫生研究,2014,43(3):508-511.
[14]李靖环.青少年个体抑郁产生的家庭因素及预防措施[J].河北大学学报:哲学社会科学版,2013, 38(3):123-128.
[15] Li J, Gan LC, Liu JY. Correlation between mental status and family dynamics among medical college students[J]. Journal of Clinical Rehabilitative Tissue Engineering Research, 2007, 11(30):6113-6115.
[16]岳云玲,周晓琴,史丹,等.青少年抑郁症患者依恋模式及家庭环境分析[J].中国学校卫生,2013, 34(5):602-603.
[17]马宏丽,雷美英,刘耿,等.心理资本对青少年抑郁的影响[J].广东医学,2015, 36(1):27-29.
基本信息:
中图分类号:B844.2
引用信息:
[1]崔怡,杨义帆,张海悦,等.陕西省青少年系统家庭动力与心理健康关系[J].中国公共卫生,2019,35(02):134-138.
基金信息:
国家自然科学基金(81773540)
2019-01-10
2019-01-10
2019-01-10