Cited by 18Orthopedic Surgery and RehabilitationResilience and Mental HealthCancer survivorship and care

Adjustment to hand injury: Cross-sectional survey exploring adjustment in relation to illness perceptions and coping strategies

Open access
Turkington, Catherine, Dempster, Martin, Maguire, Jennifer·2018·Journal of Hand Therapy

Abstract

Study design Cross-sectional descriptive.Introduction Hand injuries are highly prevalent, and the impact they have on physical, emotional, and functional adjustment is well recognized. Increasingly, adjustment to health conditions including hand injuries is being understood in terms of psychological variables.Purpose of the study To examine the role of illness beliefs and coping strategies in adjustment to hand injury. Adjustment was considered from a complete perspective including quality of life (QOL) and functional ability as well as mood and trauma symptoms.Methods Cross-sectional survey whereby consecutive patients (n = 65) attending the regional plastic surgery service with hand injuries were invited to complete a questionnaire assessing illness perceptions, coping strategies, QOL, hand functioning, depression, and trauma symptoms. Data were analyzed in SPSS (IBM Corporation, Armonk, NY) by correlation and then hierarchical regression analysis.Results Illness perceptions and coping strategies were significantly related to the adjustment outcomes (hand functioning, QOL, depression, and trauma symptoms). Specifically, poorer adjustment was associated with more negative illness beliefs (r = 0.31-0.47), greater use of denial (r = 0.24-0.53), and avoidance-based (r = 0.41-0.64) coping strategies.Discussion Illness beliefs and coping play an important role in adjustment after hand injury. Adjustment is multifaceted with a need to consider physical and emotional functioning. More optimistic beliefs and adaptive coping styles are associated with improved adjustment.Conclusion The role of psychological variables in optimizing adjustment is an important consideration for the design of psychological interventions, but because this study was cross sectional and cannot assume directional effects, future longitudinal studies are needed.Level of evidence N/A.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jht.2017.05.021

Cites

68 of 68 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • In hand therapy, CBT may be an efficient treatment to improve pain and distress by increasing adjustment to hand injury in relation to illness perception and coping strategies.

    “In hand therapy, CBT may be efficient treatment to improve pain and distress by increasing adjustment to hand injury in relation to illness perception and coping strategies [2,39-41].”

    From Development and usability testing of a web-based and therapist-assisted coping skills program for managing psychosocial problems in individuals with hand and upper limb injuries: Mixed methods study (2020) · cites this paper as [2]

    Section 4.1, “Clinical Implications and future research” (page unavailable), suggests that addressing illness beliefs and coping strategies may improve adjustment to hand injury. It does not establish that CBT improves pain or distress: the intervention discussion instead proposes ACT and says research on psychological interventions for hand injuries is very limited. (LLM, conf=0.88)

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

1 of the 69 references couldn’t be matched to a known paper.

Research works printed but not linked: 2

  1. Leventhal H, Meyer D, Narenz D. The common sense model of illness danger. In: Rachman S, eds. Medical Psychology Vol. 2. New York, NY: Pergamon: 2003:7-30.
  2. The British Pain Society. Guidelines for Pain Management Programme for Adults: an evidence-based review prepared on behalf of the British Pain Society. 2013:Accessed from https://www.britishpainsociety.org/static/uploads/resources/files/pmp2013_main_FINAL_v6. pdf

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Turkington, C., Dempster, M., & Maguire, J.
Affiliations
  • Queen's University Belfast (GB)
  • Ulster Hospital (GB)
Corresponding author
Dempster, Martin
Venue
Journal of Hand Therapy
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2018-10
Volume
31
Issue
4
Pages
502-510
ISSN
0894-1130 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2732599393
Cited by
18
References
69
Citations by year
2024: 1 · 2023: 3 · 2022: 3 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 4 · 2019: 2 · 2018: 1
FWCI
1.96
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Journal of Hand Therapy (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Portal (Queen's University Belfast) (submittedVersion, cc-by-nc-nd)
Topics
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Surgery › Orthopedic Surgery and Rehabilitation
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Clinical Psychology › Resilience and Mental Health
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Oncology › Cancer survivorship and care
Keywords
hand injuries, psychological adjustment, illness perception, coping strategies, quality of life, hand function, depression, trauma symptoms, denial, avoidance, plastic surgery patients
MeSH terms
Emotional Adjustment, Adaptation, Psychological, Adolescent, Adult, Aged, Aged, 80 and over, Cross-Sectional Studies, Female, Hand Injuries, Humans, Male, Middle Aged, Quality of Life, Surveys and Questionnaires, Self Concept, Recovery of Function, Young Adult

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review