Journal List > J Korean Acad Community Health Nurs > v.26(4) > 1058396

TOOLS
Yu and Kim: The Relationship among Subjective Health Status, Wisdom, and Self-care Agency in Korean Older Adults
Original Article

J Korean Acad Community Health Nurs 2015;26(4):355-363.

Published online: 12 December 2015

DOI: https://doi.org/10.12799/jkachn.2015.26.4.355

The Relationship among Subjective Health Status, Wisdom, and Self-care Agency in Korean Older Adults

Mijin Yu1, Hee Jung Kim2

1Department of Nursing, Yong-Nam Foreign Language College, Gyeongsan, Korea

2College of Nursing, Catholic University of Daegu, Daegu, Korea

Corresponding author: Yu, Mijin Department of Nursing, Yong-Nam Foreign Language College, 780-9 Namcheon-ro, Namcheon-myeon, Gyeongsan 712-717, Korea. Tel: +82-53-810-0164, Fax: +82-53-810-7779, E-mail: rmjin74@gmail.com

Received 2 August 2015       Revised 24 October 2015       Accepted 15 December 2015

Copyright © 2015 Korean Academy of Community Health Nursing

This is an Open Access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0) which permits unrestricted non-commercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract

Purpose

This study identified the relationships among subjective health status, wisdom, and self-care agency of Korean older adults.

Methods

The participants were 274 older adults from Daegu, aged over 65 years. Data were collected by visiting two social welfare centers, two senior welfare centers, and nine senior centers in Daegu from January 18 to February 5, 2013. Data were analyzed through one-way ANOVA, independent t-test, Pearson's correlation, and stepwise multiple linear regression using the IBM SPSS/WIN 19.0 statistical program.

Results

A significant positive correlation was found among older adults’ subjective health status, wisdom, and self-care agency. Self-care agency was affected by wisdom (47%, β=.55), the physical component summary (18%, β=.31) and mental component summary (1%, β=.12) of subjective health status, and the absence of disease (2%, β=.13).

Conclusion

This study suggests that nursing interventions to promote self-care agency in older adults should be developed based on the characteristics of their subjective health status and wisdom.

Keywords: Self-care, Health status, Aged

References

1. Statistics Korea. The elderly statistics [Internet]. Seoul: Statistics Korea;2012. [cited 2012 September 27]. Available from:. http://kostat.go.kr/portal/korea/kor_nw/2/1/index.board?bmode=read&aSeq=260368.
2. Shin DS. The influence of basic conditioning factors on self-care agency of the eldery in community [dissertation]. [Daejeon]: Chungnam National University;2007. p. 116 p.
3. Orem DE. Nursing concepts of practice. 6th ed.St Louis: Mosby, Inc;2001. p. 542 p.
4. Oh MS. The correlation between self-care agency and life satisfaction among elderly in Iksan city [master's thesis]. [Seoul]: Hanyang University;2009. p. 61 p.
5. Nam YH, Nam JR. A study of the factors affecting the subjective health status of elderly people in Korea. Korean Journal of Family Welfare. 2011; 16(4):145–162.
6. Kim HS, Hur JS. A study of influential factors on health promoting behaviors of the elderly: Focusing on senior citizens living in Seoul. Journal of the Korean Gerontological Society. 2010; 30(4):1129–1143.
7. Yang NY, Moon SY. Effects of self-esteem and health status on adaptation of elderly residents in facilities. Journal of Korean Academy of Adult Nursing. 2010; 22(5):552–560.
8. Lee DH. The effects of quality of life in the elderly's health condition. Journal of the Korean Gerontological Society. 2010; 30(1):93–108.
9. Kim MR. Factors of successful aging affecting the life satisfaction of older women. Journal of the Korean Gerontological Society. 2008; 28(1):33–48.
10. Kim MH, Min KH. Age differences of wisdom and its correlation with successful aging among middle-aged and elder adults. Journal of the Korean Gerontological Society. 2010; 30(3):947–971.
11. Kramer DA. Wisdom as a classical source of human strength: Conceptualization and empirical inquiry. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology. 2000; 19(1):83–101.
crossref
12. Linley PA. Positive adaptation to trauma: Wisdom as both process and outcome. Journal of Traumatic Stress. 2003; 16(6):601–610.
crossref
13. Ardelt M. Antecedents and effects of wisdom in old age: A longitudinal perspective on aging well. Research on Aging. 2000; 22(4):360–394. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/016402750022 4003.
14. Ardelt M. Empirical assessment of a three-dimensional wisdom scale. Research on Aging. 2003; 25(3):275–324. http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0164027503025003004.
crossref
15. Sung KW. Relation of successful aging and wisdom in Korean older adults. Journal of Korean Gerontological Nursing. 2011; 13(1):48–57.
16. Kim CG, Jang HJ, Kim SS. The correlation between ability of activity in daily living and self-care agency among elderly in Chunchon province. Journal of Korean Academic Society of Adult Nursing. 2001; 13(1):40–52.
17. Park YJ. The relationship between the self-care capacity and health status of the elderly group of public aid and the other elderly group in a district [master's thesis]. [Gwangju]: Chosun University;2007. p. 56 p.
18. Kim BI. A comparative study of self-esteem, health status and self-care in the rural and urban elderly. Korean Journal of Rehabilitation Nursing. 2004; 7(2):140–148.
19. Webster JD. An exploratory analysis of a self-assessed wisdom scale. Journal of Adult Development. 2003; 10(1):13–22.
20. Ware JE, Kosinski M, Bjorner JB, Turner-Bowker DM, Gan-dek B, Maruish ME. SF-36 health survey: Administration guide for clinical trial investigators. Lincoln, RI: QualityMetric Incorporated;2008. p. 34 p.
21. Sung KW, Lee SY, Park JH. Scale development of wisdom among Korean elderly. Journal of the Korean Gerontological Society. 2010; 30(1):65–80.
22. So HS. Testing construct validity of self-as-carer inventory and its predictors. Journal of Korean Academic Society of Adult Nursing. 1992; 4(2):147–161.
23. Geden E, Taylor S. Construct and empirical validity of the self-as-carer inventory. Nursing Research. 1991; 40(1):47–50.
crossref
24. Shim MS. A study on self-esteem, social support and health promoting behavior of the low income elderly. Journal of Korean Gerontological Nursing. 2005; 7(1):63–70.
25. Lee NH, Lim YM, Ahn YH, Kim GY. Effects of perceived health status and ego-integrity on health behavior in community dwelling elders. Korean Society of Nursing Science: The 8th International Nursing Conference. 2011; 10:159.
26. Baik OM. Factors associated with functional health outcomes in community-dwelling older adults: Applying Andersen's revised model. Journal of Community Welfare. 2011; 38:1–27.
27. Erikson EH. Identity and the life cycle. New York: W.W.Norton & Co;1980. p. 191 p.

Table 1.
The Differences in Self-care Agency according to the General Characteristics of the Participants
(N=274)
Characteristics Categories n (%) M±SD t or F (p)
Gender Male 116 (42.34) 129.32±31.31 1.79
Female 158 (57.66) 134.63±33.27 (.182)
Age (year) 65~69a 81 (29.56) 139.06±32.13 12.75
70~79b 140 (51.09) 135.79±32.30 (＜.001)
≥80c 53 (19.34) 113.17±26.30 a, b＞c
Education level Uneducateda 119 (43.43) 126.38±30.49 7.35
Elementaryb 89 (32.48) 129.18±34.24 (＜.001)
Middle schoolc 41 (14.96) 143.90±28.87 a, b＜d
Over high schoold 25 (9.12) 153.48±29.18 a＜c
Spouse Yes 135 (49.27) 140.29±31.62 16.65
No 139 (50.73) 124.71±31.60 (＜.001)
Household type Alonea 83 (30.29) 124.42±29.68 5.83
A coupleb 104 (37.96) 140.63±32.46 (＜.001)
With unmarried childrenc 16 (5.84) 115.56±37.18 a＜b
With married childrend 64 (23.36) 136.47±31.33  
With the other partnere 7 (2.55) 105.43±18.58  
Job Yes 37 (13.50) 140.30±28.64 2.55
No 237 (86.50) 131.15±32.95 (.111)
Economic status Beneficiary of basic livelihooda 17 (6.20) 108.00±28.22 22.24
Low classb 109 (39.78) 118.53±28.70 (＜.001)
Middle classc 118 (43.07) 144.01±30.15 a, b＜c, d
High classd 30 (10.95) 150.80±28.27  
Social activity Participation 111 (40.51) 144.50±30.78 28.57
None participation 163 (59.49) 124.13±31.10 (＜.001)
Disease Yes 183 (66.79) 128.40±31.57 8.51
No 91 (33.21) 140.40±33.04 (.004)
Table 2.
The Degrees of Subjective Health Status, Wisdom and Self-care Agency in the Participants
(N=274)
Variables M±SD Possible range Observed range
PCS on the subjective health status 47.13±8.82 0~100 30.00~60.14
   Physical functioning 44.75±11.03   21.18~57.54
   Role-physical 47.21±10.21   21.23~57.16
   Bodily pain 49.51±10.72   26.52~62.00
   General health 43.46±12.23   18.95~66.50
MCS on the subjective health status 48.05±10.86 0~100 30.00~62.73
   Vitality 49.56±13.08   22.89~70.42
   Social functioning 45.81±11.25   17.23~57.34
   Role-emotional 45.55±11.37   14.39~56.17
   Mental health 47.09±13.90   11.63~63.95
Wisdom 75.19±16.37 27~108 40~104
   Empathic emotion 2.89±0.62 1~4 1.36~3.91
   Self-reflection 2.70±0.67 1~4 1.22~3.89
   Experience of overcoming adversity in life 2.75±0.70 1~4 1.29~4.00
Self-care Agency 132.38±32.50 34~204 62~191
   Cognitive orientation 3.93±1.02 1~6 1.73~5.73
   Physical skill 3.85±0.99 1~6 1.56~5.67
   Decision-making and judgment process 3.82±1.16 1~6 1.40~6.00
   Information seeking behavior 3.79±1.02 1~6 1.00~6.00
   Perception to self-regulation 3.89±1.25 1~6 1.00~6.00
   Attention of self-management 3.12±0.85 1~6 1.00~4.50

PCS=Physical component summary; MCS=Mental component summary.

Table 3.
Correlations among Subjective Health Status, Wisdom, and Self-care Agency in the Participants (N=274)
Variables Self-care agency
 PCS
 MCS
r (p) r (p) r (p)
PCS .64 (＜.001)    
MCS .61 (＜.001) .79 (＜.001)  
Wisdom .69 (＜.001) .37 (＜.001) .39 (＜.001)
Table 4.
The Effect of Subjective Health Status and Wisdom on Self-care Agency
(N=274)
Variables B SE β t p Adj. R2
(Constant) −24.23 6.84   3.54 ＜.001  
Wisdom 1.10 0.08 .55 14.07 ＜.001 .47
PCS 1.16 0.21 .31 5.43 ＜.001 .18
Disease (No)† 8.69 2.60 .13 3.34 .001 .02
MCS 0.35 0.17 .12 1.97 .050 .01
Adj. R2=.68, F=144.67, p＜.001.

† Dummy variables.

TOOLS
Similar articles