BACKGROUND: Multiple sclerosis (MS) affects approximately 2.8 million people worldwide. Twenty-five per cent of people with MS report that their romantic relationship is negatively affected by MS. However, partnered individuals with MS also report lower levels of disability, and several studies have found that patient and partner well-being are correlated. Therefore, examining coping with MS from a dyadic perspective is warranted. The objectives of this study were to explore (1) individual and (2) conjoint dyadic coping strategies in couples high and low in relationship functioning. METHODS: People diagnosed with MS (n = 9) and their partners (n = 9) completed quantitative measures, and purposive sampling was used to recruit couples high and low in relationship functioning. Relationship functioning was operationalized as comprising dyadic satisfaction, cohesion and consensus, consistent with Spanier, 1976, in addition to the degree of illness-related interference within the relationship. Interviews were conducted with each member of the dyad separately, and the results were analysed using thematic analysis and later content analysis. RESULTS: Differences were found between high and low relationship functioning couples. High relationship functioning couples generally engaged in more positive coping strategies, such as active engagement, illness acceptance and conceptualizing MS as a shared issue with their partner. Low relationship functioning couples generally engaged in more negative strategies, including avoidance, ineffective communication and conceptualizing MS as an individual issue. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings highlight the significant impact that romantic relationships have on the physical and psychosocial well-being of individuals with MS.
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
K. M. McGarragle
C. J. Hare
T. L. Hart
British Journal of Health Psychology
Toronto Metropolitan University
Building similarity graph...
Analyzing shared references across papers
Loading...
McGarragle et al. (Fri,) studied this question.
www.synapsesocial.com/papers/69faa22704f884e66b532ca8 — DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/bjhp.70078