ABSTRACT
Using qualitative data, this study examines hardiness and social support among twenty-two African American and Hispanic subjects, at least 18 years of age, who received treatment for a jaw fracture and participated in an hour-long focus group to discuss the treatment they received at King/Drew Medical Center, an inner-city hospital in Los Angeles, California. Treatment was either a non-surgical wiring of the teeth closed for six to eight weeks or surgical placement of a metal bone plate in the lower jaw with a short period of jaw fixation following surgery. A mandibular fracture is one of the most common orofacial traumas for minority individuals, and the majority of these fractures among patients at urban trauma centers are a result of interpersonal violence. Thus the link between psychosocial stress and oral health is evident, yet exposure to daily stress does not automatically place one at risk for distress. Some people under daily stress have hardiness, conceptualized as an internal personal resource consisting of control, commitment, and challenge. This study examines hardiness and social support relevant to an underserved, minority population. Hardiness and social support were identified and noted in order of frequency according to participant characteristics of treatment type, gender, and ethnicity. Main themes related to hardiness and social support are highlighted with verbatim quotes providing additional context to the theme presented.
Subject(s)
Adaptation, Psychological , Black or African American , Hispanic or Latino , Jaw Fractures/rehabilitation , Jaw Fractures/surgery , Social Support , Focus Groups , Humans , Los Angeles , Medically Underserved Area , Urban PopulationABSTRACT
PURPOSE: While surgery related stress may interfere with the patient's ability to concentrate on instructions, language difficulty or low health literacy may also impede appropriate doctor/patient communication. The purpose of this study is to understand from a sample of minority patients the types of problems encountered during healing and the level of information regarding elements of postoperative instructions they recalled receiving at an inner-city safety net hospital. We initiated a qualitative study to understand the care sequence process and provision of informed consent and postoperative instruction. METHODS: African American or Latino patients, 18 years of age or older, who had third molars removed under general anesthesia or received treatment for a mandibular fracture were recruited to participate in a focus group to discuss their treatment. Patients described their problem and any informed consent given about treatment risks and benefits and postoperative information they recalled. RESULTS: A total of 137 former patients were approached, 57 agreed to participate (42%) and 34 of those (60%) completed the interview. Subjects included 14 females and 20 males. Five categories of patient problems were reported: physical, eating, treatment-related, psychosocial, and other problems. People reported 5 categories of coping strategies: medication use, physical treatments, dietary solutions, rest, and clinical assistance. Twenty people recalled being given informed consent, and 5 participants recalled no elements of informed consent. Overall, 14 participants recalled elements of postoperative instruction. CONCLUSION: Gaps in patient understanding of postoperative care suggest room for improvement in postoperative instructions. Additional research is necessary to design and test high-quality postoperative instructions for surgical treatment and recovery in populations with limited health related literacy.
