|
Relationship self-efficacy with perception of prognosis among cancer patients
|
Elaheh Seyed rasouli   , Azad Rahmani * , Vahid Zamanzadeh , Ali Ashrafi , Alireza Nikafar , Hamid Heydarzadeh |
| Tabriz University of Medical Sciences , azad.rahmani@yahoo.com |
|
|
Abstract: (28872 Views) |
| Introduction: Any change in current procedure of disclosure of cancer prognosis needs studies investigating the relationship of such information with mental status of cancer patients. The aim of the present study was to investigate the relationship between the perceptions of prognosis with self -efficacy among cancer patients.
Methods: In this descriptive-correlation study, 200 cancer patients referred to Shahid Ghazi Hospital and private offices of two oncologists in Tabriz were participated. The sampling method was convenience sampling method. Perception of prognosis was investigated by Perception of Prognosis and self-efficacy was investigated by Cancer Behavior Inventory. Data analysis was conducted by SPSS software version 13 using descriptive statistics and Pearson correlation test.
Results: The mean age of patients was 44.5 years. One hundred three patients (52.6%) were female. Participants reported positive perception about the prognosis of their disease (score 11 from 15) and rated their self-efficacy as high (score 236 from 297). There was positive correlation between perception of prognosis and spiritual health among cancer patients (r=0.39, p=0.001).
Conclusion: Patients who have a more negative perception of their prognosis had more negative self-efficacy. Therefore, cultural factors should be considered in disclosure of cancer related information. Nevertheless, approving these results needs further studies. |
|
| Keywords: Cancer, Prognosis, Self- efficacy, Perception. |
|
|
Full-Text [PDF 183 kb]
(3985 Downloads)
|
Type of Study: Research |
Subject:
Special
Received: 2014/07/21 | Accepted: 2014/07/27 | Published: 2014/07/27 | ePublished: 2014/07/27
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Send email to the article author |
|
|
|
| Add your comments about this article |
|
|
|
