| Literature DB >> 35409677 |
Marta Podhorecka1, Anna Pyszora2, Agnieszka Woźniewicz1, Jakub Husejko1, Kornelia Kędziora-Kornatowska1.
Abstract
Attitudes of healthcare workers towards the elderly significantly affect the quality of care dedicated to this group of patients. The purpose of this study was to assess the approach of Polish physiotherapists to the elderly and to analyze the factors influencing these attitudes. The study was based on a cross-sectional Internet-based survey that was conducted in the period from May to September 2021. It was completed by 252 subjects: 189 women and 63 men. The study was based on the involvement of physiotherapists with the right to practice their profession in accordance with the law in force in Poland. The tools used in the study were The Kogan Attitudes towards the Elderly (KAOP) score and The Jefferson Empathy Scale (JSE). To model the KOAP score as a function of the predictors, Bayesian linear regression was used. The average KOAP score in the sample was M (SD) = 100.7 (17.46), with the central 50% of the observations ranging from 81 to 113 points. We observed one statistically credible relationship: relevance of contacts with elderly people was positively and moderately related to KOAP. Additionally, we observed that the JSE scale was positively, but very weakly, associated with KOAP. Empathy and own experience of health care providers may protect against negative attitudes towards the elderly, meaning empathy in healthcare professionals is crucial.Entities:
Keywords: ageism; elderly; empathy; physiotherapists
Mesh:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35409677 PMCID: PMC8998115 DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19073994
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health ISSN: 1660-4601 Impact factor: 3.390
Characteristics of participants (n = 252).
| Variable | Gender | Frequency | % |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gender | female | 189 | 75 |
| male | 63 | 25 | |
| Age | 18–29 years | 80 | 31.75 |
| 30–39 years | 105 | 41.67 | |
| 40–49 years | 47 | 18.65 | |
| 50 years and more | 20 | 7.94 | |
| Place of residence | village | 51 | 20.24 |
| city up to 50 k inhabitants | 38 | 15.08 | |
| city up to 100 k inhabitants | 33 | 13.1 | |
| city up to 250 k inhabitants | 37 | 14.68 | |
| city over 250 k inhabitants | 93 | 36.9 | |
| Marital Status | single | 49 | 19.44 |
| informal relationship | 55 | 21.83 | |
| married | 139 | 55.16 | |
| separated | 9 | 3.57 | |
| Education | professional medical | 3 | 1.19 |
| bachelor’s degree | 38 | 15.08 | |
| master’s degree | 192 | 76.19 | |
| specialist | 19 | 7.54 | |
| Duration of Employment | up to 5 years | 90 | 35.71 |
| 6–10 years | 52 | 20.63 | |
| 11–20 years | 70 | 27.78 | |
| 21–30 years | 31 | 12.3 | |
| Over 31 years | 9 | 3.57 | |
| Workplace—Social Center | no | 243 | 96.43 |
| yes | 9 | 3.57 | |
| Workplace—State Healthcare—Infirmary | no | 230 | 91.27 |
| yes | 22 | 8.73 | |
| Workplace—Private Resort | no | 161 | 63.89 |
| yes | 91 | 36.11 | |
| Workplace—Self-Practice | no | 149 | 59.13 |
| yes | 103 | 40.87 | |
| Workplace—State Healthcare—Hospital | no | 177 | 70.24 |
| yes | 75 | 29.76 | |
| Workplace—Other | no | 210 | 83.33 |
| yes | 42 | 16.67 | |
| Living with an Elderly Person | yes | 166 | 65.87 |
| no | 86 | 34.13 | |
| Personal Contacts with Elderly People | never | 19 | 7.54 |
| only on occasion | 25 | 9.92 | |
| occasionally | 181 | 71.83 | |
| yes, few times a week | 27 | 10.71 | |
| Professional Contacts with Elderly People | yes | 218 | 86.51 |
| no | 29 | 11.51 | |
| I have no occasion | 5 | 1.98 | |
| Keeping contacts with Elderly People from Outside the Family | yes | 168 | 66.67 |
| no | 39 | 15.48 | |
| I have no occasion | 45 | 17.86 | |
| Relevance of Contacts with Elderly People | not important | 3 | 1.19 |
| indifferent | 39 | 15.48 | |
| important | 149 | 59.13 | |
| very Important | 61 | 24.21 |
Results of Bayesian robust linear regression with KOAP score as the dependent variable.
| β | SE | LI | UI | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intercept | −0.23 | 0.31 | −0.84 | 0.38 |
| Gender | 0 | 0.07 | −0.14 | 0.14 |
| Age | 0.46 | 0.27 | −0.06 | 0.97 |
| Place of residence | 0.12 | 0.12 | −0.11 | 0.35 |
| Marital status—Single | 0.02 | 0.14 | −0.24 | 0.3 |
| Marital status—Informal relationship | −0.01 | 0.14 | −0.29 | 0.26 |
| Marital status—Married | 0.08 | 0.11 | −0.13 | 0.3 |
| Education | 0.38 | 0.29 | −0.2 | 0.94 |
| Duration of employment | −0.11 | 0.3 | −0.7 | 0.49 |
| Social center | 0.01 | 0.17 | −0.32 | 0.34 |
| State health care—infirmary | −0.06 | 0.12 | −0.3 | 0.17 |
| Private resort | −0.08 | 0.07 | −0.22 | 0.05 |
| Self practice | 0.01 | 0.07 | −0.12 | 0.15 |
| Hospital | 0.06 | 0.08 | −0.08 | 0.22 |
| Other | 0.08 | 0.09 | −0.1 | 0.26 |
| Living with an elderly person | 0.03 | 0.07 | −0.1 | 0.16 |
| Personal contacts with elderly people | −0.09 | 0.21 | −0.51 | 0.32 |
| Professional contacts with elderly people (yes) | −0.13 | 0.16 | −0.45 | 0.18 |
| Professional contacts with elderly people (no) | −0.24 | 0.2 | −0.6 | 0.13 |
| Keeping contacts with elderly people from outside the family (yes) | −0.02 | 0.1 | −0.21 | 0.17 |
| Keeping contacts with elderly people from outside the family (no) | −0.08 | 0.12 | −0.31 | 0.16 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| σ | 0.91 | 0.04 | 0.83 | 1 |
| R2 | 0.28 | 0.04 | 0.21 | 0.35 |
Note: β and SE, respectively, are the posterior mean and standard error of the mean. LI and UI are the lower and upper boundaries of the 95% credibility interval. The [n] symbol indicates the n-th coefficient of a sum-to-zero contrast for a categorical predictor. Bolded rows indicate statistically credible regression weights. σ and ν, respectively, are scale and normality parameters of the t distribution.
Figure 1Posterior medians (points and blue line) of the predicted mean KOAP scores as a function of credible predictors. Vertical lines and shaded areas are 95% credible intervals. Grey transparent points show data. Note: relationship between KOAP and JSE.