2 resultados para mutual influence
em Université de Lausanne, Switzerland
Resumo:
This article introduces the Dyadic Coping Inventory (DCI; Bodenmann, 2008) and aims (1) to investigate the reliability and aspects of the validity of the Italian and French versions of the DCI, and (2) to replicate its factor structure and reliabilities using a new Swiss German sample. Based on 216 German-, 378 Italian-, and 198 French-speaking participants, the factor structure of the original German inventory was able to be replicated by using principal components analysis in all three groups after excluding two items in the Italian and French versions. The latter were shown to be as reliable as the German version with the exception of the low reliabilities of negative dyadic coping in the French group. Confirmatory factor analyses provided additional support for delegated dyadic coping and evaluation of dyadic coping. Intercorrelations among scales were similar across all three languages groups with a few exceptions. Previous findings could be replicated in all three groups, showing that aspects of dyadic coping were more strongly related to marital quality than to dyadic communication. The use of the dyadic coping scales in the actor-partner interdependence model, the common fate model, and the mutual influence model is discussed.
Resumo:
OBJECTIVES: We studied the influence of noninjecting and injecting drug use on mortality, dropout rate, and the course of antiretroviral therapy (ART), in the Swiss HIV Cohort Study (SHCS). METHODS: Cohort participants, registered prior to April 2007 and with at least one drug use questionnaire completed until May 2013, were categorized according to their self-reported drug use behaviour. The probabilities of death and dropout were separately analysed using multivariable competing risks proportional hazards regression models with mutual correction for the other endpoint. Furthermore, we describe the influence of drug use on the course of ART. RESULTS: A total of 6529 participants (including 31% women) were followed during 31 215 person-years; 5.1% participants died; 10.5% were lost to follow-up. Among persons with homosexual or heterosexual HIV transmission, noninjecting drug use was associated with higher all-cause mortality [subhazard rate (SHR) 1.73; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.07-2.83], compared with no drug use. Also, mortality was increased among former injecting drug users (IDUs) who reported noninjecting drug use (SHR 2.34; 95% CI 1.49-3.69). Noninjecting drug use was associated with higher dropout rates. The mean proportion of time with suppressed viral replication was 82.2% in all participants, irrespective of ART status, and 91.2% in those on ART. Drug use lowered adherence, and increased rates of ART change and ART interruptions. Virological failure on ART was more frequent in participants who reported concomitant drug injections while on opiate substitution, and in current IDUs, but not among noninjecting drug users. CONCLUSIONS: Noninjecting drug use and injecting drug use are modifiable risks for death, and they lower retention in a cohort and complicate ART.