Gebelerin Sosyal Destek Algısı ve Yaşam Kalitelerinin Değerlendirilmesi

Abstract

Giriş ve Amaç: Gebelik döneminde eş, aile ve arkadaşlar tarafından sağlanan sosyal destek, kadının fiziksel ve duygusal açıdan rahatlamasına katkı sağlamakta ve mevcut destek kaynaklarından daha etkin yararlanmasını kolaylaştırmaktadır. Bu bağlamda araştırma, gebelerin sosyal destek algıları ile yaşam kalitelerinin değerlendirilmesi amacıyla gerçekleştirilmiştir. Yöntem: Araştırma, Sivas il merkezinde bulunan 23 Aile Sağlığı Merkezi’ne kayıtlı 437 gebenin izlemleri sırasında tanımlayıcı ve kesitsel tasarımda yürütülmüştür. Veriler, yüz yüze görüşme yöntemi kullanılarak Kişisel Bilgi Formu, Çok Boyutlu Algılanan Sosyal Destek Ölçeği ve Dünya Sağlık Örgütü Yaşam Kalitesi Ölçeği aracılığıyla toplanmıştır. Bulgular: Gebelerin Algılanan Sosyal Destek Ölçeği toplam puan ortalaması 64.30±13.11 olarak bulunmuştur. Alt boyut puan ortalamaları sırasıyla eş desteği için 17.16±8.08, aile desteği için 24.59±4.14 ve arkadaş desteği için 22.54±5.79’dur. Bu bulgular gebelerin sosyal destek düzeylerinin yüksek olduğunu göstermektedir. Yaşam Kalitesi Ölçeği toplam puan ortalaması 71.15±9.07 olup; fiziksel alan 13.84±2.41, ruhsal alan 14.28±2.18, sosyal alan 14.70±2.69, çevresel alan 14.53±2.40 ve kültürel alan 13.81±2.03 olarak belirlenmiştir. Gebelerin yaşam kalitesi düzeylerinin de yüksek olduğu saptanmıştır. Sosyal destek ile yaşam kalitesi arasında zayıf düzeyde pozitif yönde istatistiksel olarak anlamlı bir ilişki bulunmuştur (rs=0.24, p<0.05). Sonuç ve Öneriler: Gebelerin sosyal destek puanları arttıkça yaşam kalitesi puanlarının da arttığı belirlenmiştir. Bu doğrultuda, sosyal destek kaynaklarının belirlenmesi ve ebeler tarafından izlem sürecinde desteklenmesi önerilmektedir.

Keywords

• gebe
• sosyal destek
• yaşam kalitesi
• ebe

Supporting Institution

Bu çalışma için herhangi bir finansal destek alınmamıştır.

Ethical Statement

Bu çalışma için gerekli etik kurul onayı ilgili kurumdan alınmıştır (Karar No: 2014-03/25). Araştırmaya katılan gebelerden aydınlatılmış onam alınmıştır. Çalışma, Helsinki Deklarasyonu ilkelerine uygun olarak yürütülmüştür. Bu makale daha önce herhangi bir dergide yayımlanmamış olup, değerlendirilmek üzere başka bir dergiye eş zamanlı olarak gönderilmemiştir. Yazarlar arasında herhangi bir çıkar çatışması bulunmamaktadır.

Evaluation of Pregnant Women’s Perceived Social Support and Quality of Life

Abstract

Purpose: Social support provided by spouses, family members, and friends during pregnancy contributes to women’s physical and emotional well-being and facilitates more effective utilization of available support resources. This study was conducted to evaluate the relationship between pregnant women’s perceived social support and their quality of life. Materials and Methods: This descriptive and cross-sectional study was conducted with 437 pregnant women registered at 23 Family Health Centers in the city center of Sivas during routine follow-up visits. Data were collected through face-to-face interviews using a Personal Information Form, the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support, and the World Health Organization Quality of Life Scale. Results: The mean total score of the Multidimensional Scale of Perceived Social Support was 64.30±13.11. The mean subscale scores were 17.16±8.08 for spouse support, 24.59±4.14 for family support, and 22.54±5.79 for friend support, indicating high levels of perceived social support. The mean total Quality of Life score was 71.15±9.07. The mean subscale scores were 13.84±2.41 for the physical domain, 14.28±2.18 for the psychological domain, 14.70±2.69 for the social domain, 14.53±2.40 for the environmental domain, and 13.81±2.03 for the cultural domain. Overall, quality of life levels were found to be high. A weak but statistically significant positive correlation was identified between perceived social support and quality of life (rs=0.24, p<0.05). Conclusion: As perceived social support increased, quality of life scores also increased. Identifying and strengthening pregnant women’s social support resources during routine midwifery follow-ups is recommended.

Keywords

• Pregnant women
• social support
• quality of life
• midwifery

Supporting Institution

No financial support was received for this study.

Ethical Statement

Ethical approval was obtained from the relevant ethics committee (Decision No: 2014-03/25). Informed consent was obtained from all participants. The study was conducted in accordance with the principles of the Declaration of Helsinki. This manuscript has not been published previously and is not under consideration for publication elsewhere. The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

1. Abanga, E. A., Ziblim, A. M., & Boah, M. (2025). Antenatal care quality and pregnancy outcomes in the northern region of Ghana: A mixed-methods analysis. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 25, 810. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-025-07915-3
2. Abdullah, P., Gallant, S., Saghi, N., Macpherson, A., & Tamim, H. (2017). Characteristics of patients receiving midwife-led prenatal care in Canada: Results from the maternity experiences survey (MES). BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 17(1), 164. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-017-1350-4
3. Aktaş, S., & Yeşilçiçek, C. (2015). Factors affecting depression during pregnancy and the correlation between social support and pregnancy depression. Iranian Red Crescent Medical Journal, 17(9), e16640. https://doi.org/10.5812/ircmj.16640
4. Al-Mutawtah, M., Campbell, E., Kubis, H. P., & Erjavec, M. (2023). Women’s experiences of social support during pregnancy: A qualitative systematic review. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 23(1), 782. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-023-06089-0
5. Anwar, M., Sirajuddin, S., Amiruddin, R., Thaha, R., Sudargo, T., & Hadi, A. J. (2019). The effect of health social determinant on the life quality of pregnant mother. Indian Journal of Public Health Research & Development, 10(10), 1604–1608. https://doi.org/10.5958/0976-5506.2019.03069.9
6. Arasteh, A., Kharaghani, R., Zenoozian, S., Moloodi, R., & Jafari, E. (2019). Effectiveness of midwifery counseling on adaptation to pregnancy, maternal-fetal attachment, and quality of life in unplanned pregnant women: A randomized controlled trial in Iran. International Journal of Pediatrics, 8(6), 11435-11448 https://doi.org/10.22038/IJP.2019.44410.3678
7. Arslan, S., Okcu, G., Coşkun, A., & Temiz, F. (2019). Women’s perception of pregnancy and the affecting factors. Journal of Health Science and Profession, 6(1), 179–192. https://doi.org/10.17681/hsp.432333
8. Ayamolowo, S. J., Olajubu, A. O., & Akintola, F. E. (2019). Perceived social support and depression among pregnant and child-rearing teenagers in Ile-Ife, Southwest Nigeria. African Journal of Midwifery and Women’s Health, 13(4), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.12968/ajmw.2018.0033

9. Azimi, M., Fahami, F., & Mohamadirizi, S. (2018). The relationship between perceived social support in the first pregnancy and fear of childbirth. Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research, 23(3), 235–239. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijnmr.IJNMR_170_16
10. Bhushan, N. L., Golin, C. E., McGrath, N., Maman, S., Tsidya, M., Chimndozi, L., & Rosenberg, N. E. (2019). The impact of HIV couple testing and counseling on social support among pregnant women and their partners in Lilongwe, Malawi: An observational study. AIDS Care, 31(2), 199–206. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540121.2018.1510102
11. Bilgen, Ö. (2020). Evlilik uyumunun gebeliğin son üç ayında yaşanan depresyona etkisi. Uluslararası Sosyal Bilimler ve Eğitim Dergisi, 2(2), 138–153.
12. Chae, S. Y., Chae, M. H., Kandula, S., & Winter, R. O. (2017). Promoting improved social support and quality of life with the CenteringPregnancy® group model of prenatal care. Archives of Women’s Mental Health, 20(1), 209–220. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00737-016- 0698-1
13. Dağlar, G., Nur, N., Bilgiç, D., & Özkan, S. A. (2019). Gebelerin stresle başa çıkma tarzları ile yaşam kalitesi arasındaki ilişki. Çukurova Medical Journal, 44(3), 1– 11. https://doi.org/10.17826/cumj.491840
14. Dilcen, H. Y., & Genç, R. E. (2019). Travmatik doğumun önlenmesinde ebenin rolü. Life Sciences, 14(3), 64–73. https://doi.org/10.12739/nwsa.2019.14.3.4b0026
15. Durmuş, E. (2019). Gebelikte anemi görülme sıklığı ve yaşam kalitesi ile ilişkisi (Yüksek lisans tezi, Adnan Menderes Üniversitesi).
16. Erbil, N., & Akın, O. (2024). The effect of perceived social support on pregnancy stress: A descriptive and crosssectional study. International Journal of Caring Sciences, 17(1), 426–437.
17. Eker, D., Arkar, H., & Yaldız. H. (2001) Factorial structure, validity, and reliability of revised form of the multidimensional scale of perceived social support. Turkish Journal of Psychiatry, 12(1), 17-25
18. Eser, E., Fidaner, H., Fidaner, C., Eser, S.Y., Eser, E., & Göker, E. (1999). Psychometric properties of the WHOQOL1OO and WHOQOL-BREF. Psychiatry Psychology Psychopharmacology Journal, 7, 23–40.
19. Fathnezhad-Kazemi, A., Aslani, A., & Hajian, S. (2021). Association between perceived social support and health-promoting lifestyle in pregnant women: A cross-sectional study. Journal of Caring Sciences, 10(2), 96–102. https://doi.org/10.34172/jcs.2021.018
20. Friedman, L. E., Gelaye, B., Sanchez, S. E., & Williams, M. A. (2020). Association of social support and antepartum depression among pregnant women. Journal of Affective Disorders, 264, 201–205. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jad.2019.12.017
21. Hajihatamloo, H., Ebrahimi, M., Alinejad, V., & Bayrami, R. (2025). Anxiety, self-compassion, perceived social support and resilience in two groups of primiparous pregnant women fully and not attending childbirth preparation classes. BMC Psychology, 13(1), 467. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40359-025-02723-y
22. Hetherington, E. L. (2019). Social support in a pregnant and postnatal population (Unpublished doctoral thesis). University of Calgary. http://hdl.handle.net/1880/110214
23. Ibanez, G., Khaled, A., Renard, J. F., Rohani, S., & Nizard, J. (2017). Back pain during pregnancy and quality of life of pregnant women. Primary Health Care, 7(261). https://doi.org/10.4172/2167-1079.1000261
24. Iwanowicz-Palus, G., Zarajczyk, M., Pięta, B., & Bień, A. (2019). Quality of life, social support, acceptance of illness, and self-efficacy among pregnant women with hyperglycemia. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(20), 3941. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16203941
25. Jiang, L., & Zhu, Z. (2022). Maternal mental health and social support from online communities during pregnancy. Health & Social Care in the Community, 30(6), e6332–e6344. https://doi.org/10.1111/hsc.14075
26. Jonsdottir, S. S., Thome, M., Steingrimsdottir, T., Lydsdottir, L. B., Sigurdsson, J. F., Olafsdottir, H., & Swahnberg, K. (2017). Partner relationship, social support and perinatal distress among pregnant Icelandic women. Women and Birth, 30(1), e46–e55. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2016.08.005
27. Kanığ, M., & Eroğlu, K. (2019). Perceived level of social support among pregnant women and affecting factors. Journal of Nursing Education and Research, 16(2), 125–133. https://doi.org/10.5222/head.2019.125
28. Karimi, Z., Dadgar, F., Abdollahi, M., Yousefi, S., Tolyat, M., & Khosravi Anbaran, Z. (2017). The relationship between minor ailments of pregnancy and quality of life in pregnant women. Iranian Journal of Obstetrics, Gynecology and Infertility, 20(6), 8–21. https://doi.org/10.22038/ijogi.2017.9320
29. Kazarian, S.S., & McCabe, S.B. (1991). Dimensions of social support in the MSPSS: factorial structure, reliability, and theoretical implications. J Community Psychol, 19(2), 150-60.
30. Kazemi, F., Nahidi, F., & Kariman, N. (2017). Exploring factors behind pregnant women’s quality of life in Iran: A qualitative study. Electronic Physician, 9(12), 5991– 6001. https://doi.org/10.19082/5991
31. Khan, M. J., Israr, A., Basharat, I., Shoukat, A., Mushtaq, N., & Farooq, H. (2017). Prevalence of pregnancy related low back pain in third trimester and its impact on quality of life and physical limitation. Journal of Islamic International Medical College, 12(1), 39–43.
32. Lagadec, N., Steinecker, M., Kapassi, A., Magnier, A. M., Chastang, J., Robert, S., & Ibanez, G. (2018). Factors influencing the quality of life of pregnant women: A systematic review. BMC Pregnancy and Childbirth, 18(1), 455. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12884-018- 2087-4
33. Liu, M. C., Kuo, S. H., Chou, F. H., Chan, T. F., & Yang, Y. H. (2019). Transformation of quality of life in prenatal women with nausea and vomiting. Women and Birth, 32(6), 543–548. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.wombi.2018.10.009
34. Mermer, G., Bilge, A., Yücel, U., & Çeber, E. (2010). Gebelik ve doğum sonrası dönemde sosyal destek algısı düzeylerinin incelenmesi. Psikiyatri Hemşireliği Dergisi, 1(2), 71-76. https://doi.org/10.5505/phd.2012.57441
35. Metin, A. (2014). Gebelerin algıladıkları sosyal destek ile prenatal bağlanma arasındaki ilişki (Doktora tezi).
36. Mogharab, F., Inaloo, R., Javadpour, S., Jamali, S., & Poornowrooz, N. (2018). The correlation between health literacy and quality of life in pregnant women. Medical Science, 22(93), 503–508.
37. Mondragón, C. V. P., Dorado, H. M., Gómez, S. Y. M., Martínez, R. A. O., Linthon, S. A., & Benavides, A. C. L. (2019). Relationship between the absence of adequate social support during pregnancy and low birth weight. Revista Colombiana de Psiquiatría, 48(3), 140–148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.rcpeng.2017.11.002
38. Nazzal, S., Ayed, A., Zaben, K. J., Abu Ejheisheh, M., ALBashtawy, M., & Batran, A. (2024). The relationship between quality of life and social support among pregnant women: A cross-sectional study. SAGE Open Nursing, 10. https://doi.org/10.1177/23779608241301225
39. Panda, A., Parida, J., Jena, S., Pradhan, A., Pati, S., Kaur, H., & Acharya, S. K. (2024). Perception, practices and understanding of teenage pregnancy among the adolescent girls in India: A scoping review protocol. Journal of Family Medicine and Primary Care, 13(4), 1169–1177. https://doi.org/10.4103/jfmpc.jfmpc_1674_22
40. Pınar, S. E., Aksoy, O. D., Cesur, B., Bilgiç, D., Dağlar, G., & Güler, E. (2017). Investigation of the relationship between fear of childbirth and social supports of pregnant women in the third trimester in Turkey. Clinical and Experimental Obstetrics & Gynecology, 44(5), 767–771. https://doi.org/10.12891/ceog3642.2017
41. Puspitasari, N. (2023). Development of indicators to measure quality of life for pregnant women (QOL-PW). Journal of Preventive Medicine and Hygiene, 64(1), E55–E63. https://doi.org/10.15167/2421- 4248/jpmh2023.64.1.1777
42. Shaghaghi, F., Abedian, Z., Asgharipour, N., Esmaily, H., & Forouhar, M. (2020). Effect of positive psychology interventions on the quality of prenatal care offered by midwives: A field trial. Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research, 25(2), 102–110. https://doi.org/10.4103/ijnmr.IJNMR_104_18
43. Şen, E., & Şirin, A. (2013). Preterm eylem tanısı alan gebelerin kaygı, depresyon ve algılanan sosyal destek düzeyini etkileyen faktörler. Gaziantep Medical Journal, 19(3), 159–163. https://doi.org/10.5455/GMJ-30-2013-149
44. Şimşek, H. N., Demirci, H., & Bolsoy, N. (2018). Sosyal destek sistemleri ve ebelik. Düzce Üniversitesi Sağlık Bilimleri Enstitüsü Dergisi, 8(2), 97–103.
45. Toptaş, B., Aksu, H., Özsoy, S., & Dündar, T. (2019). Social support status and the affecting factors in pregnant women. Journal of Human Sciences, 16(3), 736–745. https://doi.org/10.14687/jhs.v16i3.5618
46. Xiaowen, W., Guangping, G., Ling, Z., Jiarui, Z., Xiumin, L., Zhaoqin, L., & Lin, L. (2018). Depression and anxiety mediate perceived social support to predict healthrelated quality of life in pregnant women living with HIV. AIDS Care, 30(9), 1147–1155. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540121.2018.1456640
47. Yang, W. C., Sabwa, S., Mebratie, A. D., Amboko, B., Mugenya, I., Kim, S., ... & Arsenault, C. (2025). Quality of antenatal care and perinatal outcomes: evidence from a cohort study in Ethiopia, Kenya, South Africa, and India. medRxiv, 2025-04. https://doi.org/10.1101/2025.04.10.25325357
48. Yazdi, M. S., Nasiri, R., Jomei, M. G., & Yazdi, S. S. (2020). Quality of life and general health in pregnant women conceived with assisted reproduction technologies: A case-control study. International Journal of Fertility & Sterility, 13(4), 271–277. https://doi.org/10.22074/ijfs.2020.5684
49. Yılmaz, F., & Pasinlioğlu, T. (2014). Gebelerde algılanan sosyal destek ile gebeliğe ve anneliğe uyum arasındaki ilişkinin incelenmesi. Uluslararası Hakemli Kadın Hastalıkları ve Anne Çocuk Sağlığı Dergisi, 1(1), 14-24. https://doi.org/10.17367/JACSD.2014019294
50. Yüksel, A., & Bayrakcı, H. (2019). Self-efficacy, psychological well-being and perceived social support levels in pregnant women. International Journal of Caring Sciences, 12(2), 1–10.
51. Zamani, P., Ziaie, T., Lakeh, N. M., & Leili, E. K. (2019). The correlation between perceived social support and childbirth experience in pregnant women. Midwifery, 75, 146–151. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.midw.2019.05.002