Main Article Content
Study Design: This research is Quantitative Research using analytic observational with a cross-sectional approach. Background: Amputation hurts patients physically, psychologically and socially. Permanent physical disability due to amputation affects the thought, feeling and behavior of the patient, because patient will have the negative feeling on body image that can cause a feeling that he is not useful, worry about losing his job, pessimistic about the future and limit social relationships with self-withdrawal, so that patient will experience depression. Objectives: This research is to determine the factor affecting the subjective well being of transfemoral prosthesis users in Indonesia. Methods: The sample in this study was 110 users of the transfemoral prosthesis with a simple random sampling technique. The Data collection technique is using questionnaires and documentation. It was used Structural Equation Modeling (SEM) to analyze the data. Results: The result of this study had a statistically significant effect between motivation (p = 0.031), self-efficacy (p = 0.030), religiosity (p = 0.020), social support (p = 0.027), and optimism (p = 0.033) toward subjective well being. Conclusions: motivation, self-efficacy, religiosity, social support and optimism are the factors affecting the subjective well being of transfemoral prosthesis users in Indonesia. Clinical Relevance: Patient who had undergone amputation will have an effect on their subjective well being. It is important to know the factor affecting subjective well being of above knee amputation that use prosthesis. The factors are motivation, self-efficacy, religiosity, social support and optimism.
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.
Authors wishing to include figures, tables, or text passages that have already been published elsewhere are required to obtain permission from the copyright owner(s) for both the print and online format and to include evidence that such permission has been granted when submitting their papers. Any material received without such evidence will be assumed to originate from the authors.
2. Peirano AH, Franz RW. Spirituality and quality of life in limb amputees. Int J Angiol 2012; 21: 47–52.
3. Bactiar D, Jamari A, Budiwan I. Perancangan Biomekanisme Sendi Protesa Untuk Pasien Amputasi Tungkai Di Atas Lutut Dengan Desain Ergonomi Dan Fleksibel. Pros SNST ke-7 Tahun 2016 Fak Tek Univ Wahid Hasyim Semarang 7 2016; 7–12.
4. Perkins ZB, De’Ath HD, Sharp G, et al. Factors affecting outcome after traumatic limb amputation. Br J Surg 2012; 99: 75–86.
5. Deans SA, McFadyen AK, Rowe PJ. Physical activity and quality of life: A study of a lower-limb amputee population. Prosthet Orthot Int 2008; 32: 186–200.
6. Thomas CL. Taber’s Cyclopedic Medical Dictionary. F. A. Davis, Philadelphia, 1993.
7. Armstrong DG, Lavery LA, Van Houtum WH, et al. The impact of gender on amputation. J Foot Ankle Surg 1997; 36: 66–69.
8. British Society of Rehabilitation Medicine. Amputee and Prosthetic Rehabilitation-Standards and Guidelines (3 rd Edition), www.bsrm.org.uk (2018).
9. Horgan O, MacLachlan M. Psychosocial adjustment to lower-limb amputation: A review. Disabil Rehabil 2004; 26: 837–850.
10. Jacobsen JM. Nursing’s role with amputee support groups. J Vasc Nurs 1998; 16: 31–34.
11. Wald J, Alvaro R. Psychological factors in work-related amputation: Considerations for rehabilitation counselors. J Rehabil 2004; 70: 6–15.
12. Mininistry of Health Indonesia. Peraturan Menteri Kesehatan Republik Indonesia Nomor 22 Tahun 2013 Tentang Penyelenggaraan Pekerjaan dan Praktik Ortotis Prostetis. Ministry of Health Indonesia, 2013.
13. Smeltzer SC, Bare BG. Brunner & Suddarth’s medical-surgical nursing. 13th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott., https://books.google.co.id/books?id=xfxKDwAAQBAJ (2014).
14. Linton JD. Assessing the economic rationality of remanufacturing products. J Prod Innov Manag 2008; 25: 287–302.
15. Wijayanti W. Implementasi kebijakan SD-SMP Satu Atap (Studi Multisitus di Kecamatan Ngablak, Pakis dan Sawangan Kabupaten Magelang). Universitas Negeri Malang, http://karya-ilmiah.um.ac.id/index.php/disertasi/article/view/10807 (2011).
16. Young-Moo L, Yong-Gun L, Boo-Gil S, et al. How Participation Motivation Affects The Psychological and Subjective Well-Being of Korean Golfers. Indian J Public Heal Res Dev 2019; 9: 1362–1367.
17. Conversano C, Rotondo A, Lensi E, et al. Optimism and Its Impact on Mental and Physical Well-Being. Clin Pract Epidemiol Ment Heal 2010; 6: 25–29.
18. Hisam A, Ashraf F, Rana MN, et al. Health related quality of life in patients with single lower limb amputation. J Coll Physicians Surg Pakistan 2016; 26: 851–854.
19. Adeyemo DA, Adeleye AT. Emotional Intelligence, Religiosity and Self-Efficacy as Predictors of Psychological Well-Being among Secondary School Adolescents in Ogbomoso, Nigeria. Eur J Psychol; 4. Epub ahead of print 27 February 2008. DOI: 10.5964/ejop.v4i1.423.
20. Carver CS, Scheier MF, Segerstrom SC. Optimism. Clin Psychol Rev 2010; 879–889.
21. Faltas S, Faltas M, Ameen DA. Self-Eficacy of Patients with Lower Limb Amputation : Nursing Guidelines. 12 th Int Congr Integr Sci Res Educ Evid Based Pract Nursing.
22. Susanti R. Hubungan Religiusitas dan Kualitas Kehidupan Kerja dengan Organizational Citizenship Behavior (OCB) Pada Karyawan. J Psikol UIN Sultan Syarif Kasim Riau 2015; 11: 94–102.
23. Murphy PE, Ciarrocchi JW, Piedmont RL, et al. The relation of religious belief and practices, depression, and hopelessness in persons with clinical depression. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology 2000; 68: 1102–1106.
24. Yeary KHK, Ounpraseuth S, Moore P, et al. Religion, Social Capital, and Health. Rev Relig Res 2012; 54: 331–347.
25. Russell JEA. Promoting subjective well-being at work. J Career Assess 2008; 16: 117–131.
26. Xi X, Wang Y, Jia B. The Effect of Social Support on Subjective Well-being:Mediator Roles of Self-esteem and Self-efficacy. 2017; 121: 493–505.
27. Yasin MASM, Dzulkifli MA. The Relationship between Social Support and Psychological Problems among Students. Int J Bus Soc Sci 2010; 1: 110–116.
28. Kreis S, Molto A, Bailly F, et al. Relationship between optimism and quality of life in patients with two chronic rheumatic diseases: Axial spondyloarthritis and chronic low back pain: A cross sectional study of 288 patients. Health Qual Life Outcomes 2015; 13: 1–6.
29. Perera HN, McIlveen P. The role of optimism and engagement coping in college adaptation: A career construction model. J Vocat Behav 2014; 84: 395–404.
30. Ho PJ, Gernaat SAM, Hartman M, et al. Health-related quality of life in Asian patients with breast cancer: A systematic review. BMJ Open; 8. Epub ahead of print 2018. DOI: 10.1136/bmjopen-2017-020512.