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

Mijin Yu; Hee Jung Kim

doi:10.12799/jkachn.2015.26.4.355

Articles

Page Path: HOME > J Korean Acad Community Health Nurs > Volume 26(4); 2015 > Article

Original Article
The Relationship among Subjective Health Status, Wisdom, and Self-care Agency in Korean Older Adults: Mijin Yu¹, Hee Jung Kim²; Journal of Korean Academy of Community Health Nursing 2015;26(4):355-363.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.12799/jkachn.2015.26.4.355
Published online: December 12, 2015

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: August 2, 2015 • Revised: October 24, 2015 • Accepted: December 15, 2015

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.

prev next

622 Views
0 Download

Full Article

Download PDF

Abstract
References

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.
Key Words: Self-care; Health status; Aged

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
Gender	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	Uneducated^a	119 (43.43)	126.38±30.49	7.35
	Elementary^b	89 (32.48)	129.18±34.24	(＜.001)
	Middle school^c	41 (14.96)	143.90±28.87	a, b＜d
	Over high school^d	25 (9.12)	153.48±29.18	a＜c
Spouse	Yes	135 (49.27)	140.29±31.62	16.65
Spouse	No	139 (50.73)	124.71±31.60	(＜.001)
Household type	Alone^a	83 (30.29)	124.42±29.68	5.83
	A couple^b	104 (37.96)	140.63±32.46	(＜.001)
	With unmarried children^c	16 (5.84)	115.56±37.18	a＜b
	With married children^d	64 (23.36)	136.47±31.33
	With the other partner^e	7 (2.55)	105.43±18.58
Job	Yes	37 (13.50)	140.30±28.64	2.55
Job	No	237 (86.50)	131.15±32.95	(.111)
Economic status	Beneficiary of basic livelihood^a	17 (6.20)	108.00±28.22	22.24
	Low class^b	109 (39.78)	118.53±28.70	(＜.001)
	Middle class^c	118 (43.07)	144.01±30.15	a, b＜c, d
	High class^d	30 (10.95)	150.80±28.27
Social activity	Participation	111 (40.51)	144.50±30.78	28.57
Social activity	None participation	163 (59.49)	124.13±31.10	(＜.001)
Disease	Yes	183 (66.79)	128.40±31.57	8.51
Disease	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
Variables	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.

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. Article
12. Linley PA. Positive adaptation to trauma: Wisdom as both process and outcome. Journal of Traumatic Stress. 2003;16(6):601–610. Article PubMed
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/10.1177/0164027503025003004Article PDF
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. Article PubMed
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.

Figure & Data

References

Citations

Citations to this article as recorded by

PubReader
Cite

CITE

export Copy Format

Close

XML Download

We recommend

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

Characteristics	Categories	n (%)	M±SD	t or F (p)
Gender	Male	116 (42.34)	129.32±31.31	1.79
Gender	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	Uneducated^a	119 (43.43)	126.38±30.49	7.35
	Elementary^b	89 (32.48)	129.18±34.24	(＜.001)
	Middle school^c	41 (14.96)	143.90±28.87	a, b＜d
	Over high school^d	25 (9.12)	153.48±29.18	a＜c
Spouse	Yes	135 (49.27)	140.29±31.62	16.65
Spouse	No	139 (50.73)	124.71±31.60	(＜.001)
Household type	Alone^a	83 (30.29)	124.42±29.68	5.83
	A couple^b	104 (37.96)	140.63±32.46	(＜.001)
	With unmarried children^c	16 (5.84)	115.56±37.18	a＜b
	With married children^d	64 (23.36)	136.47±31.33
	With the other partner^e	7 (2.55)	105.43±18.58
Job	Yes	37 (13.50)	140.30±28.64	2.55
Job	No	237 (86.50)	131.15±32.95	(.111)
Economic status	Beneficiary of basic livelihood^a	17 (6.20)	108.00±28.22	22.24
	Low class^b	109 (39.78)	118.53±28.70	(＜.001)
	Middle class^c	118 (43.07)	144.01±30.15	a, b＜c, d
	High class^d	30 (10.95)	150.80±28.27
Social activity	Participation	111 (40.51)	144.50±30.78	28.57
Social activity	None participation	163 (59.49)	124.13±31.10	(＜.001)
Disease	Yes	183 (66.79)	128.40±31.57	8.51
Disease	No	91 (33.21)	140.40±33.04	(.004)

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

Variables	Self-care agency	PCS	MCS
Variables	r (p)	r (p)	r (p)
PCS	.64 (＜.001)
MCS	.61 (＜.001)	.79 (＜.001)
Wisdom	.69 (＜.001)	.37 (＜.001)	.39 (＜.001)

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.

Table 1. The Differences in Self-care Agency according to the General Characteristics of the Participants (N=274)

Table 2. The Degrees of Subjective Health Status, Wisdom and Self-care Agency in the Participants (N=274)

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)

Table 4. The Effect of Subjective Health Status and Wisdom on Self-care Agency (N=274)