TY - JOUR
T1 - A supportive-educative intervention for tuberculosis patients
T2 - Integrated self-care and family-centered nursing
AU - Melizza, Nur
AU - Hargono, Rachmat
AU - Makhfudli,
N1 - Publisher Copyright:
© 2021, LLC Science and Innovations, Saratov, Russia.
PY - 2022
Y1 - 2022
N2 - Aim - This study aims to evaluate the effect of supportive educative system intervention on Tuberculosis (TB) patient's family support. Material and Methods - This study was a quantitative study with a quasi-experimental design, conducted in the Public Health Center (PHC) of Kedungkandang and Ciptomulyo with 48 respondents. The respondents were divided into the control group with standard PHC intervention (n=24) and the treatment group with standard PHC intervention added with the supportive educative system (n=24). The data were analyzed by paired t-test and independent t-test. Results - There was a significant difference in family support between treatment and control. The results indicated that a supportive educative system significantly increases family support (p=0.003). Interestingly, PHC standard intervention showed improvement in family support (68.46±73.58) than supportive educative system (74.29±75.83). Supportive educative system interventions were less effective than standard PHC interventions. It could be influenced by sample characteristics, time of the study, control of variables, and other factors. Conclusion - Supportive educative interventions are effective in improving family support but are no better than standard PHC interventions.
AB - Aim - This study aims to evaluate the effect of supportive educative system intervention on Tuberculosis (TB) patient's family support. Material and Methods - This study was a quantitative study with a quasi-experimental design, conducted in the Public Health Center (PHC) of Kedungkandang and Ciptomulyo with 48 respondents. The respondents were divided into the control group with standard PHC intervention (n=24) and the treatment group with standard PHC intervention added with the supportive educative system (n=24). The data were analyzed by paired t-test and independent t-test. Results - There was a significant difference in family support between treatment and control. The results indicated that a supportive educative system significantly increases family support (p=0.003). Interestingly, PHC standard intervention showed improvement in family support (68.46±73.58) than supportive educative system (74.29±75.83). Supportive educative system interventions were less effective than standard PHC interventions. It could be influenced by sample characteristics, time of the study, control of variables, and other factors. Conclusion - Supportive educative interventions are effective in improving family support but are no better than standard PHC interventions.
KW - Family support
KW - intervention
KW - public health center
KW - supportive educative system
KW - tuberculosis
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85128340024&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.15275/rusomj.2022.0106
DO - 10.15275/rusomj.2022.0106
M3 - Article
AN - SCOPUS:85128340024
SN - 2304-3415
VL - 11
JO - Russian Open Medical Journal
JF - Russian Open Medical Journal
IS - 1
M1 - e0106
ER -