Factors Associated with Work Readiness and Adjustment in Cardiac Rehabilitation Patients
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
1477 Work recovery is challenging for many cardiac patients. Many do not return to work and many have limitations following return to work. Studies have focused on the endpoint of work status and have not examined readiness to return to work and adjustment following return to work. PURPOSE: This preliminary study was undertaken to examine the influence of cardiac rehabilitation (CR) exposure, selfefficacy, sickness, job demands and social support on work readiness and adjustment (WRA) in patients with cardiac disease. METHODS: Cross-sectional design with questionnaire (N = 102) and clinical data (N = 45) collected at from patients at program entry, 6 and 12 months of CR. Dependent measures included a novel, visual analogue scale (0 – not ready return to work; 10 – back to work and managing well) of work adjustment. Independent measures included self-report of morbidity, illness perception, disease impact, functional ability, self efficacy, job demands and social support. Clinical variables included measures of disease severity and functional capacity. Data were analysed through correlation and multiple regression methods. RESULTS: Participants had and average age of 57 ± 10.7 years with a median duration of illness of 31 weeks. Eighty-two percent were male, 73% were married or equivalent. Fifty-three percent had undergone coronary artery bypass grafting, 57% had suffered a myocardial infarction, and 37% were experiencing angina. Sixty nine percent of participants in the sample were working. Patients who were working differed significantly in their selfrating of WRA (8.37/10 ± 2.05) from those not working (4.25/10 ± 2.57, t test, p<.001). Significant associations were found between WRA and measures of self-efficacy, illness perceptions and impact, morbidity, depression, angina and self-report of function. No association was observed between WRA and clinical measures of disease severity or functional capacity. Forward stepwise regression produced a model of WRA consisting of self-efficacy (B = .30), employer support (B = .31), physical job demands (B = .18), emotional function (B = .257) and illness identity (B = −.16). Patients with more exposure to CR indicated better WRA (B = .199, adjusted R2 = .58). CONCLUSIONS: A continuous measure of WRA is associated with work status and multiple individual and social factors. Measuring WRA in this fashion may provide a more expansive picture of the role of interventions such as CR and other factors in returning patients to optimal role function and quality of life.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,003 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,002 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».