25
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares

      Patient Preference and Adherence (submit here)

      This international, peer-reviewed Open Access journal by Dove Medical Press focuses on the growing importance of patient preference and adherence throughout the therapeutic process. Sign up for email alerts here.

      34,896 Monthly downloads/views I 2.314 Impact Factor I 3.8 CiteScore I 1.14 Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) I 0.629 Scimago Journal & Country Rank (SJR)

      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Ego mechanisms of defense are associated with patients’ preference of treatment modality independent of psychological distress in end-stage renal disease

      research-article

      Read this article at

      ScienceOpenPublisherPMC
      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          Several parameters mediate the selection of treatment modality in end-stage renal disease (ESRD). The nephrology community suggests that patient preference should be the prime determinant of modality choice. We aimed to test whether ego mechanisms of defense are associated with patients’ treatment modality preferences, independent of psychological distress. In 58 eligible ESRD patients who had themselves chosen their treatment modality, we administered the Symptom Distress Checklist-90-R and the Defense Style Questionnaire. Thirty-seven patients (53.4%) had chosen hemodialysis and 21 (46.6%) peritoneal dialysis. Patients who preferred peritoneal dialysis were younger (odds ratio [OR], 0.89; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.804–0.988), had received more education (OR, 8.84; 95% CI: 1.301–60.161), and were twice as likely to adopt an adaptive defense style as compared to patients who preferred hemodialysis (57.1% vs 27.0%, respectively; P < 0.033). On the contrary, the latter were more likely to adopt an image-distorting defense style (35.1% vs 14.3%; P = 0.038) and passive–aggressive defenses (OR, 0.73: 95% CI: 0.504–1.006). These results were independent of psychological distress. Our findings indicate that the patient’s personality should be taken into account, if we are to better define which modalities are best suited to which patients. Also, physicians should bear in mind passive–aggressive behaviors that warrant attention and intervention in patients who preferred hemodialysis.

          Most cited references49

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          The moderator-mediator variable distinction in social psychological research: conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations.

          In this article, we attempt to distinguish between the properties of moderator and mediator variables at a number of levels. First, we seek to make theorists and researchers aware of the importance of not using the terms moderator and mediator interchangeably by carefully elaborating, both conceptually and strategically, the many ways in which moderators and mediators differ. We then go beyond this largely pedagogical function and delineate the conceptual and strategic implications of making use of such distinctions with regard to a wide range of phenomena, including control and stress, attitudes, and personality traits. We also provide a specific compendium of analytic procedures appropriate for making the most effective use of the moderator and mediator distinction, both separately and in terms of a broader causal system that includes both moderators and mediators.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Borderline personality organization.

            O Kernberg (1967)
              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: found
              • Article: not found

              How do risk factors work together? Mediators, moderators, and independent, overlapping, and proxy risk factors.

              The authors developed a methodological basis for investigating how risk factors work together. Better methods are needed for understanding the etiology of disorders, such as psychiatric syndromes, that presumably are the result of complex causal chains. Approaches from psychology, epidemiology, clinical trials, and basic sciences were synthesized. The authors define conceptually and operationally five different clinically important ways in which two risk factors may work together to influence an outcome: as proxy, overlapping, and independent risk factors and as mediators and moderators. Classifying putative risk factors into these qualitatively different types can help identify high-risk individuals in need of preventive interventions and can help inform the content of such interventions. These methods may also help bridge the gaps between theory, the basic and clinical sciences, and clinical and policy applications and thus aid the search for early diagnoses and for highly effective preventive and treatment interventions.
                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Journal
                Patient Prefer Adherence
                Patient preference and adherence
                Dove Medical Press
                1177-889X
                2010
                24 March 2010
                : 4
                : 25-32
                Affiliations
                [1 ]Associate Professor of Psychiatry, Department of Psychiatry, Medical School, University of Ioannina, Ioannina, Greece;
                [2 ]Nephrologist, Renal Clinic, Hippocration General Hospital, Athens, Greece;
                [3 ]Department of Nephrology, University of Athens, Greece
                Author notes
                Correspondence: Thomas Hyphantis, Associate Professor of Psychiatry, University of Ioannina, Medical School, Department of Psychiatry, Ioannina 45110, Greece, Tel +30 26 5109 7322, Email tyfantis@ 123456cc.uoi.gr
                Article
                ppa-4-025
                10.2147/PPA.S7796
                2846137
                20361063
                74f3e0d9-7ad2-4bf0-b900-0539888a6f9f
                © 2010 Hyphantis et al, publisher and licensee Dove Medical Press Ltd.

                This is an Open Access article which permits unrestricted noncommercial use, provided the original work is properly cited.

                History
                : 16 February 2010
                Categories
                Original Research

                Medicine
                end-stage renal disease,hemodialysis,peritoneal dialysis,ego mechanisms of defense,dsq,psychopathology

                Comments

                Comment on this article