BMC psychology · 2026
What are the predominant factors predicting trend of post-traumatic growth for patients after bone tumour surgery? A longitudinal observational study.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Liu Ying, Zheng Xiaofeng, Li Peifang, Wang Yitian, Wang Jie, Tu Chongqi, Duan Hong, Chen Jiali, Ning Ning
Аннотация
AIM: To investigate the predominant factors predicting trend of post-traumatic growth for patients after bone tumour surgery.
METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal observational study with convenience sampling. Follow-up examinations were conducted every two weeks over a total follow-up period of one month. Post-traumatic growth (PTG) levels were measured using the Chinese version of the Post-Traumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI-C). Latent Category Growth Model (LCGM) was applied to explore the latent trajectory categories of PTG. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to explore the predictors and influencing factors for patients with different trajectories.
RESULTS: A total of 153 patients were included in the study, and 141 patients completed the follow-up. The means of PTGI-C at different monitoring time were 41.24 ± 21.94, 44.56 ± 23.33, and 40.69 ± 22.63, respectively. Repeated measures analysis of variance with univariate revealed statistically significant differences in PTGI-C across different time (F = 3.372, P = 0.02). Patients were categorized into two latent subgroups: an increasing trend group (intercept = 44.276, slope = 5.152, P < 0.001) and a decreasing trend group (intercept = 35.164, slope = - 4.718, P < 0.001) based on two-category LCGM model. Low levels of post traumatic stress (vs. high levels) were associated with increased odds of decreasing PTG trajectory (OR 2.67, P = 0.015), indicating a risk factor. Unmarried status (vs. married) and giant cell tumour (OR = 0.223, P = 0.047), fibrogenic tumours (OR = 0.127, P = 0.007), cartilaginous origin tumour (OR = 0.194, P = 0.034), and other tumours (OR = 0.169, P = 0.023, vs. osteosarcoma) were protective factors.
CONCLUSION: The classification of PTG change trajectory suggested different positive psychological processes in patients with bone tumours. Identifying the influencing factors of patients in the PTG decline trend group can guide nurses to provide effective intervention in time.
CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: ChiCTR2300074170 (Registration Date: 1st August 2023).
METHODS: We conducted a longitudinal observational study with convenience sampling. Follow-up examinations were conducted every two weeks over a total follow-up period of one month. Post-traumatic growth (PTG) levels were measured using the Chinese version of the Post-Traumatic Growth Inventory (PTGI-C). Latent Category Growth Model (LCGM) was applied to explore the latent trajectory categories of PTG. Univariate and multivariate analyses were conducted to explore the predictors and influencing factors for patients with different trajectories.
RESULTS: A total of 153 patients were included in the study, and 141 patients completed the follow-up. The means of PTGI-C at different monitoring time were 41.24 ± 21.94, 44.56 ± 23.33, and 40.69 ± 22.63, respectively. Repeated measures analysis of variance with univariate revealed statistically significant differences in PTGI-C across different time (F = 3.372, P = 0.02). Patients were categorized into two latent subgroups: an increasing trend group (intercept = 44.276, slope = 5.152, P < 0.001) and a decreasing trend group (intercept = 35.164, slope = - 4.718, P < 0.001) based on two-category LCGM model. Low levels of post traumatic stress (vs. high levels) were associated with increased odds of decreasing PTG trajectory (OR 2.67, P = 0.015), indicating a risk factor. Unmarried status (vs. married) and giant cell tumour (OR = 0.223, P = 0.047), fibrogenic tumours (OR = 0.127, P = 0.007), cartilaginous origin tumour (OR = 0.194, P = 0.034), and other tumours (OR = 0.169, P = 0.023, vs. osteosarcoma) were protective factors.
CONCLUSION: The classification of PTG change trajectory suggested different positive psychological processes in patients with bone tumours. Identifying the influencing factors of patients in the PTG decline trend group can guide nurses to provide effective intervention in time.
CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: ChiCTR2300074170 (Registration Date: 1st August 2023).