Mediating effect of anxiety and depression between family function and hope in patients receiving maintenance hemodialysis: A cross-sectional study

Introduction

The incidence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) is quickly growing, owing to the aging population and the rising prevalence of diabetes (Zhang & Zhou, 2021). According to the United States Renal Data System's 2020 annual data release, the number of patients with ESRD in the United States reached 780,000 in 2019, increased by 40.4% from 2009 (Johansen et al., 2021). Maintenance hemodialysis (MHD) is the most common alternative treatment for ESRD. More and more patients are on MHD. On the other hand, MHD is a long-term or even lifelong treatment. Patients may lose hope as a result of physiological and psychological changes that occur throughout this time (Zhang, Xue, Chen, An, & Chen, 2020). Hope is a multidimensional, dynamic inner force that can assist people in safely navigating through difficult situations or life events while also having a beneficial impact (Herth, 1992). Hope has been proven in study to be a crucial regulatory mechanism for chronic diseases and to be able to forecast the onset of serious illnesses (Grealish et al., 2019). Patients' self-care, quality of life, and overall health can all be improved by increasing their hope (Tavassoli, Darvishpour, Mansour-Ghanaei, & Atrkarroushan, 2019). Patients with MHD who have hope for the future feel better in all aspects of their quality of life, and having an ideal life can help to feel more hopeful. Recently, studies on the hope of MHD patients have focused on influencing factors and correlations, but the effect of family function on hope has received less attention and requires further investigation (Orlandi, Pepino, Pavarini, Dos Santos, & de Mendiondo, 2012; Alshraifeen et al., 2020; Zhao & Wang, 2000).

Family function, according to Skinner, Steinhauer, & Sitarenios (2000), is the ability of a family as a whole to meet the diverse needs of family members, as evidenced by mutual care, mutual support, emotional communication between family members, and the ability to face life events and pressures together. It has been reported that family function is a significant source of hope and plays a critical role in keeping hope (Arnaert, Filteau, & Sourial, 2006; Wang et al., 2017).

Anxiety and depression are the most common mental health problems in MHD patients and are the predominant expressions of unpleasant feelings in patients. The incidence of anxiety and depression in MHD patients ranged from 20.00–50.00% and 20.00–60.00%, respectively (Al Naamani, Gormley, Noble, Santin, & Al Maqbali, 2021; Cukor et al., 2007; Kimmel et al., 2000). Long-term anxiety and depression not only reduce the quality of life of MHD patients, but also affect the adequacy of dialysis, thereby increasing their risk of re-hospitalization and death (Al Naamani, Gormley, Noble, Santin, & Al Maqbali, 2021). Anxiety and depression can also affect patients' cognitive function by reducing the activity of brain-derived neurotrophic factor (BDNF) and altering brain architecture, according to Wu et al. (2017). Family function, according to Liu, Zhao, Wang, Song, & Wang (2019), is a significant factor influencing the prevalence and progression of anxiety and depression in patients. The tension of MHD patients cannot be released under the pressure of disease. The resulting anxiety and depression will affect their physical and mental health, reduce their quality of life, and thus reduce their hope level, according to studies (Rahimipour, Shahgholian, & Yazdani, 2015; Duggleby, Lee, Nekolaichuk, & Fitzpatrick-Lewis, 2021). As a result, the family function may influence MHD patients' hope levels through anxiety or depression.

There is a substantial association between anxiety and depression, according to the tripartite model of anxiety and depression (Renner, Hock, Bergner-Kother, & Laux, 2018). Anxiety is marked by physiological hyperarousal, which manifests as tension, nervousness, shakiness, and panic symptoms. Depression is marked by hopelessness and loneliness (Joiner, Catanzaro, & Laurent, 1996). It has been reported that patients' hopelessness was the most important factor causing the lack of hope ( Miller, 1991). Thus, it is concluded that depression may have a greater impact on hope. According to the interpersonal relationship theoretical model (Chang, Zhu, Zhang, & Li, 2021), the family function is the key content of social support, and excellent social support can reduce anxiety, which can subsequently lead to depression reduction. As a result, MHD patients' family function may increase their hope level by lowering anxiety and depression.

However, based on our knowledge to date, there is limited research on the association between anxiety, depression, family function, and hope, and a potential mechanism of hope has not been explored among the MHD population. Therefore, based on literature review (Arnaert, Filteau, & Sourial, 2006; Wang et al., 2017; Liu, Zhao, Wang, Song, & Wang, 2019; Rahimipour, Shahgholian, & Yazdani, 2015; Duggleby, Lee, Nekolaichuk, & Fitzpatrick-Lewis, 2021; Renner, Hock, Bergner-Kother, & Laux, 2018; Chang, Zhu, Zhang, & Li, 2021), we proposed a potential theoretical framework for hope (Fig. 1) after analyzing the relationship between hope, family function, depression and anxiety in MHD patients and intended to evaluate using a structural equation model (SEM). The significance of hope for patients is different from that of normal people, and it is a unique internal power of patients. Our study will help provide medical staff with new nursing practices to improve patients' levels of hope. The higher the patient's level of hope, the faster recovery from failure, leading to positive coping behaviors, which are conducive to the improvement of their condition and quality of life.

Aim

The aim of this cross-sectional study was to explore the internal mechanisms of hope in MHD patients and to provide a reference for hope intervention plans in this population. The specific aims were as follows: (a) to investigate the characteristics of hope, family function, depression, and anxiety in MHD patients; (b) to analyze the relationship among hope, family function, depression and anxiety in MHD patients; (c) to examine whether anxiety and depression paly a chain mediating effect in the relationship between family function and hope. Figure 1 is a potential theoretical framework for hope based on literature review, so the following hypotheses were proposed:

Family function will significantly predict hope. (Family function → Hope)

Anxiety will mediate the relationship between family function and hope. ( Family function → Anxiety → Hope)

Depression will mediate the relationship between family function and hope. (Family function → Depression → Hope)

Anxiety and depression will play a chain mediating effect in the relationship between family function and hope. (Family function → Anxiety → Depression → Hope)

Methods

Design and sample

This study was a descriptive cross-sectional survey of MHD patients. From June to September 2021, 227 convenience samples were recruited from the Hemodialysis Centers of two tertiary hospitals in Wuhan, Hubei Province, China. Participants could have been considered if they matched the following criteria: (1) at least 3 months of MHD treatment, (2) at least 18 years of age, (3) no cognitive or communication problems, (4) informed consent and willingness to engage in the study. Participants may be excluded if they have (1) an acute/critical illness involving the heart, brain, or lungs, (2) psychiatric conditions (i.e., DSM diagnosis), or (3) have participated in previous clinical trials during this study. In total, 250 MHD patients were invited to take part in this study, and 235 agreed to participate, for a response rate of 94.0%. Ultimately, 227 questionnaires were included in the eventual study sample, 8 patients were excluded due to obvious logical errors.

The sample size of the model should be 10 to 15 times the observed variables (These include adaptation, partnership, growth, affection, resolve, anxiety, depression, factor 1, 2 and 3 of hope) when using the SEM for analysis (Gustafsson & Martenson, 2002). The final model was decided to have ten observed variables. Given a 20% sample loss, the sample size should be 120 to 180, which means 227 samples match the criteria.

Measures

Demographic and clinical characteristics. A self-made questionnaire was used to measure the demographic and clinical characteristics of participants. The contents of the questionnaire included: gender, age, education, marital status, duration of dialysis, type of vascular access and diabetes.

Family APGAR Index (APGAR). The APGAR (Smilkstein, 1978) includes five subscales: adaptation, partnership, growth, affection, and resolve. A three-point Likert scale (0= “rarely” to 2= “often”) is used and the total score of 5 items varies from 0 to 10, with higher scores suggesting a higher level of family function. The total score is divided into three levels: low (0 to 3), medium (4 to 6), and high (7 to 10). The instrument has been proven to be valid and reliable, and has been used among Chinese hemodialysis patients (Lv & Gu, 1995). In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.894.

Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS). The HADS (Zigmond & Snaith, 1983) includes two subscales: anxiety and depression. A four-point Likert scale (0= “definitely the same” to 3= “not at all”) is used and the total score of 14 items varies from 0 to 21, with higher scores suggesting a higher level of anxiety and depression. The total score is divided into three levels: low (0 to 7), medium (8 to 10), and high (11 to 21). The instrument has been proven to be valid and reliable, and has been used among Chinese hemodialysis patients (Ye, 1993). In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.894, and the Cronbach’s alpha of 2 subscales ranged from 0.803 to 0.806.

Herth Hope Index (HHI). The HHI (Herth, 1992) includes three subscales: Factor 1 (temporality and future), Factor 2 (positive readiness and expectancy) and Factor 3 (interconnectedness). A four-point Likert scale (1= “strongly disagree” to 4= “strongly agree”) is used and the total score of 12 items varies from 12 to 48, with higher scores suggesting a higher level of hope. The total score is divided into three levels: low (12 to 23), medium (24 to 35), and high (36 to 48). The instrument has been proven to be valid and reliable, and has been used among Chinese hemodialysis patients (Zhao & Wang, 2000). In this study, the Cronbach’s alpha coefficient was 0.870.

Data collection procedure

The research team consisted of three members. The team leader oversaw the overall design and quality control, while the other members were responsible for research coordination, participant recruitment, and data collection. To recruit MHD patients, we contacted the nursing officials in the nursing departments of the 2 tertiary hospitals individually, introduced the aim and procedure of our study, and asked their consent for recruiting participants in their hospitals. Before the questionnaire was collected, two researchers carried out nursing practice for one month in the hemodialysis centers of two hospitals, in order to establish a good relationship with MHD patients and facilitate the data collection. The survey was conducted between 1 hour after dialysis began and 1 hour before dialysis ended, when the circulation was stable during this period. The researchers collected questionnaires using an electronic questionnaire. Researchers introduced the purpose, informed consent and filling methods of the study to patients, who completed the questionnaire independently or under the guidance of the researcher. Researchers will check the questionnaire in time after the participants fill in the questionnaire. Incomplete entries will be asked to be supplemented on the spot.

Data analysis

SPSS version 26.0 and AMOS version 24.0 (IBM Corporation, Armonk, New York, USA) were used to analyze the data. Frequency and percentage were used to describe categorical variables. Mean and standard deviation (SD) were used to describe continuous variables. Correlation analysis was used to analyze the relationships between the study variables. Exploratory factor analysis was used to test common method biases. SEM was used to construct and evaluate the chain mediating model. Bias-corrected bootstrapping method was used to test the significance of the mediating effect. Full mediation was confirmed if direct effect was not significant. Partial mediation was confirmed if direct effect was significant. Ratio of chi-square to degrees of freedom (χ²/df < 3.00), root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA < 0.08), goodness-of-fit index (GFI < 0.90), adjusted goodness-of-fit index (AGFI < 0.90), comparative fit index (CFI < 0.90), and tucker-lewis index (TLI < 0.90) were used to evaluate the global goodness of fit of the model. All statistical tests were conducted by two-sided tests, and P values of < 0.05 indicated statistical significance.

Result

Test of common method biases

Exploratory factor analysis was utilized because this study used self-reported data, which could lead to common method biases. There were 9 variables with characteristic roots greater than 1. The first factor could only explain 27.30 percent of the key standards, less than 40% (Deng, Li, Chen, Luo, & Zeng, 2018), indicating that there were no severe common method biases in this study.

Sample characteristics

Of the 227 participants, 56.80% were male. The average age was 54.15 (SD = 15.12; range from 18 to 90) years, 28.60% were educated more than higher school, 78.00% were married, and 51.10% have received dialysis for more than 3 years. Autogenous arteriovenous fistula was selected by 60.40% of participants. 40.10% of the patients had diabetes. More information about sample characteristics is reported in Table 1.

Table 1

Sample characteristics (n = 227).
Variables	Categories	n (%)
Gender	Male	129(56.80)
	Female	98(43.20)
Age	<45	72(31.70)
	45–60	74(32.60)
	>60	81(35.70)
Education	Primary	63(27.80)
	Secondary	99(43.60)
	Higher	65(28.60)
Marital status	Married	177(78.00)
	Single	38(16.70)
	Divorced/widowed	12(5.30)
Duration of dialysis (year)	<1	55(24.20)
	1–3	56(24.70)
	>3	116(51.10)
Type of vascular access	Autogenous arteriovenous fistula	137(60.40)
	Artificial blood vessels	16(7.00)
	Central venous catheter	74(32.6)
Diabetes	Yes	91(40.1)
	No	136(59.9)

Hope, family function, depression and anxiety scores

Table 2 shows the means and standard deviations among the study variables. The mean score of hope was 34.64 (SD = 7.21), indicating a medium level of hope. The mean score of family function was 6.21 (SD = 2.90), indicating moderate impairment. The mean score of depression was 5.91 (SD = 4.37) and the prevalence was 22.03% (50 cases). The mean score of anxiety was 4.32 (SD = 4.02) and the prevalence rate was 35.24% (80 cases).

Table 2

Mean and standard deviations among the variables (n = 227).
Variables	Mean ± SD	The mean of the item
Hope	34.64 ± 7.21	2.89 ± 0.60
Temporality and future	11.73 ± 2.45	2.93 ± 0.61
Positive readiness and expectancy	11.55 ± 2.89	2.89 ± 0.72
Interconnectedness	11.37 ± 2.66	2.84 ± 0.67
Family function	6.21 ± 2.90	1.24 ± 0.58
Adaptation	1.33 ± 0.76	1.33 ± 0.76
Partnership	1.17 ± 0.79	1.17 ± 0.79
Growth	1.15 ± 0.81	1.15 ± 0.81
Affection	1.12 ± 0.78	1.12 ± 0.78
Resolve	1.28 ± 0.84	1.28 ± 0.84
Depression	5.91 ± 4.37	0.84 ± 0.62
Anxiety	4.36 ± 4.02	0.62 ± 0.57

Correlations of family function, anxiety, depression, and hope

Table 3 shows that there was positive correlation between family function and hope (r = 0.467, p < 0.01), depression was negatively correlated with family function (r =-0.443, p < 0.01) and with hope (r = -0.432, p < 0.01). There was positive correlation between anxiety and depression (r = 0.685, p < 0.01), negative correlation between anxiety and family function (r = -0.475, p < 0.01), and negative correlation between anxiety and hope (r = -0.314, p < 0.01).

Table 3

Correlations between observed variables (n = 227).
Variables	1	2	3	4	5	6	7	8	9	10	11	12
1.Family function	1
2.Adaptation	0.651^**	1
3.Partnership	0.612^**	0.239^**	1
4.Growth	0.704^**	0.471^**	0.286^**	1
5.Affection	0.693^**	0.302^**	0.462^**	0.382^**	1
6.Resolve	0.737^**	0.439^**	0.306^**	0.533^**	0.442^**	1
7.Depression	-0.475^**	-0.201^**	-0.206^**	-0.352^**	-0.372^**	-0.472^**	1
8.Anxiety	-0.443^**	-0.258^**	-0.279^**	-0.371^**	-0.302^**	-0.361^**	0.685^**	1
9.Hope	0.467^**	0.242^**	0.387^**	0.303^**	0.441^**	0.267^**	-0.314^**	-0.432^**	1
10.Temporality and future	0.392^**	0.166^*	0.307^**	0.225^**	0.422^**	0.219^**	-0.272^**	-0.355^**	0.874^**	1
11.Positive readiness and expectancy	0.468^**	0.233^**	0.385^**	0.316^**	0.405^**	0.282^**	-0.297^**	-0.403^**	0.929^**	0.730^**	1
12.Interconnectedness	0.396^**	0.251^**	0.349^**	0.271^**	0.369^**	0.216^**	-0.277^**	-0.406^**	0.896^**	0.655^**	0.759^**	1
Note. ^p<0.05, ^*p<0.01.

Mediating effect analysis

To test the aforementioned research hypothesis, we utilized SEM to design a chain mediating model with family function as the independent variable, anxiety and depression as the mediating variables, and hope as the dependent variable. Anxiety and depression were manifest variables, while family function and hope were latent variables. Adaptation, partnership, growth, affection, and resolve as response indicators of family function. Factor 1, 2 and 3 as response indicators of hope. The model fit index after modification was as follows: χ²/df = 2.013, RMSEA = 0.067, GFI = 0.947, AGFI = 0.906, CFI = 0.966, and TLI = 0.922. The model fit index conforms to the best-fit criteria and fits well. Figure 2 shows the final model with standardized path coefficients. Family function positively predicted hope (β = 0.352, p = 0.001). H1 was supported. Family function negatively predicted anxiety (β=-0.537, p = 0.001) and depression (β = -0.186, p = 0.001). Anxiety positively predicted depression (β = 0.585, p = 0.001). Depression negatively predicted hope (β = -0.277, p = 0.001). Anxiety was not associated with hope (β= -0.055, p = 0.215), while other pathways reached statistically significant levels (p < 0.05).

Further, the bias-corrected bootstrapping method was used to test the mediating effect of anxiety and depression. The sample was taken as a population and repeated 5000 times. Indirect effect (mediating effect) was identified as significant when the 95% bootstrap confidence interval (CI) of an effect did not include 0. The results showed that the upper and lower bounds of the 95% CI (0.064 to 0.243) of the total indirect effect between anxiety and depression on family function and hope didn’t include 0, indicating that the mediating effect was significant. The upper and lower bounds of the 95% CI (0.010 to 0.119) of the indirect effect 1 between depression on family function and hope didn’t include 0, indicating that the mediating effect was significant. These results support H3. The upper and lower bounds of the 95% CI (0.038 to 0.163) of the indirect effect 2 between anxiety and depression on family function and hope didn’t include 0, indicating that the chain mediating effect was significant. These results support H4. The upper and lower bounds of the 95% CI (-0.174 to 0.033) of the indirect effect 3 between anxiety on family function and hope include 0, indicating that the mediating effect wasn't significant. These results do not support H2. The upper and lower bounds of the 95% CI (0.144 to 0.549) of the direct effect of family function on hope didn’t include 0, indicating that the direct effect was significant, again supporting H1. Therefore, the types of mediation in this study were partial mediation. The direct effect value of the family function on hope was 0.352, the total indirect effect value was 0.139, the total effect value was 0.491, and the total effect size was 28.31% (0.139/0.491). The decomposition of mediating effects is shown in Table 4.

Table 4

Total, direct, total indirect and specific indirect effects (n = 227).
Structural path	Standard coefficients (Effect value / β)	Effect size	95%CI
Structural path	Standard coefficients (Effect value / β)	Effect size	Lower	Upper
Total effect	0.491	100.00%	0.329	0.638
Direct effect	0.352	71.69%	0.144	0.549
Total indirect effect	0.139	28.31%	0.064	0.243
Indirect effect 1	0.052	10.59%	0.010	0.119
Indirect effect 2	0.087	17.72%	0.038	0.163
Indirect effect 3	0.062	-	-0.174	0.033
Note. Indirect effect 1: Family function → Depression → Hope; Indirect effect 2: Family function → Anxiety → Depression → Hope; Indirect effect 3: Family function → Anxiety → Hope.

Discussion

To the best of our knowledge, this is the first study that investigated the chain mediating effects of anxiety and depression in the relationship between family function and hope in MHD patients. The hope of MHD patients was found to be moderate in this study, which was consistent with a previous study (Du, Yan, Ma, & Xie, 2017). The reasons may be as follows: On the one hand, the patients in this study had been on dialysis for more than 3 months. Their health status was stable, and they were physically and psychologically better accustomed and accepted to hemodialysis. Meanwhile, 78.0% (177 cases) of MHD patients in this study were married and had stable family relationships, which contributes to the maintenance of their hope level. On the other hand, due to the complexity and specialization of the disease, MHD patients may have psychological fear and worry about the further deterioration of the condition and poor prognosis, resulting in low level of hope.

The family function of MHD patients was found to be moderately impaired in our study, which was similar to the findings of the previous study (Liu, Zhao, Wang, Song, & Wang, 2019). The reasons may be as follows: First, due to disease and self-avoidance, patients may be prone to role change and status adjustment in the family, which will increase their own psychological pressure and thus impair emotional communication between family members. Second, MHD patients require long-term dialysis and have relatively low self-care ability, which means that family caregivers need to bear long-term medical expenses and daily care of patients. The heavy care work has a great impact on the physical and mental health of caregivers, thus reducing the intimacy between family members. However, family caregivers are not always negative in the process of care, but experience more positive feelings. The family members usually give patients more care, help and spiritual support, increasing the patients' hope for life and actively dealing with the negative impact of the disease, according to a two-factor model (Lawton, Moss, Kleban, Glicksman, & Rovine, 1991).

The prevalence of anxiety was 22.03 percent (50 cases) and the prevalence of depression was 35.24 percent (80 cases) in our study, which was similar to the results from Al Naamani, Gormley, Noble, Santin, & Al Maqbali (2021). The reasons may be as follows: First, it's possible that MHD treatment causes mental deterioration in patients, which has a negative impact on their mental health. Second, the high prevalence of new coronaviruses, as well as their concerning implications, would exacerbate anxiety and depression symptoms in MHD patients (Al Naamani, Gormley, Noble, Santin, & Al Maqbali, 2021). Third, ERSD patients have long-term urotoxin deposition, renal anemia, calcium and phosphorus metabolism disorder, hyperparathyroidism and other factors that damage brain nerve cells, and then show varying degrees of cognition impairment, according to the hypothesis of "kidney-brain axis" neurodegeneration (Bugnicourt, Godefroy, Chillon, Choukroun, & Massy, 2013). However, regular hemodialysis treatment can remove urotoxin from the body and improve anemia symptoms, thus improving cognition impairment. Previous studies have shown that better cognitive function can improve patients' negative emotions, which is conducive to the construction of patients' confidence in overcoming the disease (Feng, Lu, Wang, & Li, 2021).

The findings of this study demonstrated that family function was linked to hope, which was consistent with earlier research (Wang et al., 2017). According to the positive psychology theory (Wang et al., 2021). Hope is a positive cognitive process that people have toward the future, which indicates that people have optimistic wishes and expectations for life and the future while not knowing what will happen in the future. Patients with MHD have to deal with unpredictability in disease development as well as the financial burden of long-term dialysis treatment. Family support can help patients to gain knowledge of the disease, treat it more optimistically, and adopt positive coping mechanisms, increasing their hope level.

Depression was found to have a substantial negative relationship with family function and hope. According to the social support buffer model (Boumans & Landeweerd, 1992), when people are in danger, family support can assist to buffer the negative consequences of stress and thereby reduce depression. Positive emotions have been proven to help patients gain confidence in their ability to overcome disease and hence boost their degree of hope (Wang et al., 2017). As a result, MHD patients who have better family function have better mental health, fewer depressive symptoms, and are more likely to use appropriate and positive coping strategies, thus they may have a higher sense of hope, while patients who do not have the company and support of family members must confront the pressures of disease and life alone, which can lead to depression, as well as a loss of motivation and confidence in the future and life, and a low level of hope. Thus, family function has an impact on MHD patients' hope via depression.

Anxiety and depression were found to be a chain mediating effect in the relationship between family function and hope in the outcomes of the mediating effect. It is in line with the interpersonal relationship theoretical model (Chang, Zhu, Zhang, & Li, 2021), which states that good family function can alleviate depressive symptoms by reducing anxiety. At the same time, depression acted as a mediator between anxiety and hope, implying that anxiety's effect on hope can be fulfilled through depression. As a result, depression had a stronger impact on hope than anxiety. The better MHD patients' family function, the less anxiety experience, which lessens depressive symptoms and, as a result, enhances their degree of hope.

This is the first study to use the SEM method to investigate the chain mediating effect of anxiety and depression in the relationships between family function and hope. Our findings suggest that family function influences hope in MHD patients through a psychological mechanism. Therefore, interventions can be provided from the following aspects to improve the level of hope of patients. First, to improve family function. Based on the family system therapy (Skinner, Steinhauer, & Sitarenios, 2000), medical staff can help family members build a supportive relationship with the patient, aiding family members in assisting the patient in focusing on current life, reassessing perceived problems or pressures, and setting appropriate expectations and goals. Second, to improve anxiety and depression symptoms. Medical staff can use cognitive behavioral therapy, mindfulness therapy, sensory art therapies and other psychotherapeutic methods (Bosman et al., 2021; Newland & Bettencourt, 2020; Thoma, Pilecki, & McKay, 2015). With the development of computer networks, computerized cognitive behavioral therapy (CCBT) has been helpful in improving anxiety and depression in MHD patients. CCBT is psychotherapy that changes patients' thinking or behavior through computer interactive interface, combined with web pages, cartoons, animations, videos, sound and other highly structured media interactions (Liu et al., 2021). Compared with other methods, CCBT has the advantages of simple operation, intervention at any time, saving manpower and cost, and can assist nurses to carry out psychological intervention for patients with anxiety and depression. In addition, traditional Chinese medicine (TCM) can also be used for treatment, such as the five-element music therapy of TCM (Wu & Yang, 2021), baduanjin exercise (Fu, Wang, Zhou, Lin, & Li, 2021 ) and so on. Finally, as family function improves, symptoms of anxiety and depression decrease, leading to increased levels of hope.

The study has some limitations. First, the data were collected from two hospitals in one province, which might not be representative of all MHD patients in China. Second, the subjective nature of self-report questionnaires may not reflect the actual situation of the patients. Third, this is a descriptive cross-section. It is difficult to assess the change of study variables over time, and no causal inference could be made. Thus, the following points can be considered for future research: First, future research should include a larger sample size using tertiary hospitals in multiple regions. Second, the combination of subjective and objective measurement tools to evaluate study variables, such as adding patients' clinical examination and medical records to the subjective assessment of anxiety or depression, can better and more accurate assessment of anxiety or depression. Third, longitudinal study can be carried out and more hope-related variables can be added to further enrich the theoretical framework of this study. Finally, the results of the mediation analysis in this study can be used to tailor interventions for MHD patients to improve their level of hope.

It should be noted that there are differences between Chinese and Western family cultures. Thus, it should be cautious to extend our results to MHD populations in other countries after fully understanding the culture between Chinese and Western families and seeking common ground while reserving differences. It will be interesting to validate the results of this study in a culturally diverse MHD population in the future.

References

Zhang, Y., & Zhou, Y. (2021). Current status of dialysis treatment in patients with end-stage renal disease in China. China Medicine, 16(8), 1273–1276. https://doi.org/10.3760/j.issn.1673-4777.2021.08.035
Johansen, K. L., Chertow, G. M., Foley, R. N., Gilbertson, D. T., Herzog, C. A., Ishani, A., … Wetmore, J. B. (2021). US Renal data system 2020 annual data report: epidemiology of kidney disease in the United States. American journal of kidney diseases: the official journal of the National Kidney Foundation, 77(4 Suppl 1), A7-A8. https://doi.org/10.1053/j.ajkd.2021.01.002
Zhang, Y., Xue, G., Chen, Y., An, K., & Chen, L. (2020). Factors related to spiritual health in chinese haemodialysis patients: A multicentre cross-sectional study. Nursing Open, 7(5), 1536–1543. https://doi.org/10.1002/nop2.535
Herth, K. (1992). Abbreviated instrument to measure hope: development and psychometric evaluation. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 17(10), 1251–1259. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2648.1992.tb01843.x
Grealish, L., Hyde, M. K., Legg, M., Lazenby, M., Aitken, J. F., Dunn, J., & Chambers, S. K. (2019). Psychosocial predictors of hope two years after diagnosis of colorectal cancer: Implications for nurse-led hope programmes. European journal of cancer care, 28(3), https://doi.org/10.1111/ecc.13010
Tavassoli, N., Darvishpour, A., Mansour-Ghanaei, R., & Atrkarroushan, Z. (2019). A correlational study of hope and its relationship with spiritual health on hemodialysis patients. Journal of Education and Health Promotion, 8, 146. https://doi.org/10.4103/jehp.jehp_461_18
Orlandi, F. d. S., Pepino, B. G., Pavarini, S. C. I., Dos Santos, D. A., & de Mendiondo, M. S. Z. (2012). The evaluation of the level of hope of elderly chronic kidney disease patients undergoing hemodialysis. Revista Da Escola de Enfermagem Da U S P, 46(4), 900–905.
Alshraifeen, A., Al-Rawashdeh, S., Herth, K., Alnuaimi, K., Alzoubi, F., Khraim, F., & Ashour, A. (2020). The association between hope and quality of life in haemodialysis patients. British Journal of Nursing, 29(21), 1260–1265. https://doi.org/10.12968/bjon.2020.29.21.1260
Zhao, H. P., & Wang, J. (2000). Social support and hope for hemodialysis patients. Chinese Journal of Nursing, 35(5), 49–51.
Skinner, H., Steinhauer, P., & Sitarenios, G. (2000). Family assessment measure (FAM) and process model of family functioning. Journal of Family Therapy, 22(2), 190–210. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-6427.00146
Arnaert, A., Filteau, N., & Sourial, R. (2006). Stroke patients in the acute care phase: role of hope in self-healing. Holistic Nursing Practice, 20(3), 137–146.
Wang, H. Y., Wang, T. Y., Du, J., Zhao, L. F., Xi, H. J., & Guo, Z. Y. (2017). Hope level in peritoneal dialysis patients: current situation and its related factors. Chinese Journal of Blood Purification, 16(10), 692–695. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1671-4091.2017.010.013
Al Naamani, Z., Gormley, K., Noble, H., Santin, O., & Al Maqbali, M. (2021). Fatigue, anxiety, depression and sleep quality in patients undergoing haemodialysis. BMC Nephrology, 22(1), 157. https://doi.org/:10.1186/s12882-021-02349-3
Cukor, D., Coplan, J., Brown, C., Friedman, S., Cromwell-Smith, A., Peterson, R. A., & Kimmel, P. L. (2007). Depression and anxiety in urban hemodialysis patients. Clinical Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, 2(3), 484–490.
Kimmel, P. L., Peterson, R. A., Weihs, K. L., Simmens, S. J., Alleyne, S., Cruz, I., & Veis, J. H. (2000). Multiple measurements of depression predict mortality in a longitudinal study of chronic hemodialysis outpatients. Kidney International, 57(5), 2093–2098.
Wu, D., Wang, K., Wei, D., Chen, Q., Du, X., Yang, J., & Qiu, J. (2017). Perfectionism mediated the relationship between brain structure variation and negative emotion in a nonclinical sample. Cognitive, Affective & Behavioral Neuroscience, 17(1), 211–223. https://doi.org/10.3758/s13415-016-0474-8
Liu, H. L., Zhao, Q. L., Wang, K. X., Song, S. S., & Wang, J. (2019). Study on mediating role of family function between activity of daily living and post-stroke depression among stroke patients. Chinese Nursing Research, 33(19), 3350–3355. https://doi.org/10.12102/j.issn.1009-6493.2019.19.011
Rahimipour, M., Shahgholian, N., & Yazdani, M. (2015). Effect of hope therapy on depression, anxiety, and stress among the patients undergoing hemodialysis. Iranian Journal of Nursing and Midwifery Research, 20(6), 694–699. https://doi.org/10.4103/1735-9066.170007
Duggleby, W., Lee, H., Nekolaichuk, C., & Fitzpatrick-Lewis, D. (2021). Systematic review of factors associated with hope in family carers of persons living with chronic illness. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 77(8), 3343–3360. https://doi.org/10.1111/jan.14858
Renner, K. H., Hock, M., Bergner-Kother, R., & Laux, L. (2018). Differentiating anxiety and depression: the state-trait anxiety-depression inventory. Cognition Emotion, 32(7), 1409–1423. https://doi.org/10.1080/02699931.2016.1266306
Joiner, T. E., Catanzaro, S. J., & Laurent, J. (1996). Tripartite structure of positive and negative affect, depression, and anxiety in child and adolescent psychiatric inpatients. Journal of Abnormal Psychology, 105(3), 401–409.
Miller, J. F. (1991). Developing and maintaining hope in families of the critically ill. AACN Clinical Issues In Critical Care Nursing, 2(2), 307–315.
Chang, J. J., Zhu, H. D., Zhang, X. Y., & Li, C. X. (2021). Effect of social support on adolescents’ prosocial behavior: mediating effect of social anxiety and depression. Modern Preventive Medicine, 48(12), 2210–2213 + 2267.
Gustafsson, J. E., & Martenson, R. (2002). Structural equation modeling with AMOS: Basic concepts, applications, and programming. Contemporary Psychology: APA Review of Books, 47(4), 478–480.
Smilkstein, G. (1978). The family APGAR: a proposal for a family function test and its use by physicians. The Journal of family practice, 6(6), 1231–1239.
Lv, F., & Gu, Y. (1995). Family APGAR questionnaire and its clinical application. Foreign Medicine (Hospital Management Section), (2), 56–59.
Zigmond, A. S., & Snaith, R. P. (1983). The hospital anxiety and depression scale. Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica, 67(6), 361–370. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1600-0447.1983.tb09716.x
Ye, W. F. (1993). Application and evaluation of "General hospital Anxiety and depression Scale" in general hospital patients. Chinese Journal of Behavioral Medicine, 2(3), 17–19.
Deng, W., Li, X. Y., Chen, B., Luo, K., & Zeng, X. Y. (2018). Analysis on application of common methods bias test to psychological studies during recent five years in china. Journal of Jiangxi Normal University (Natural Science), 42(5), 447–453. https://doi.org/10.16357/j.cnki.issn1000-5862.2018.05.02
Du, J. M., Yan, J., Ma, X. W., & Xie, H. (2017) Effects of family factors and self-management on aspiration level in maintenance hemodialysis patients. Journal of Nursing Administration, 17(9), 623–625.
Lawton, M. P., Moss, M., Kleban, M. H., Glicksman, A., & Rovine, M. (1991). A two-factor model of caregiving appraisal and psychological well-being. Journal of Gerontology, 46(4), P181-P189.
Bugnicourt, J.-M., Godefroy, O., Chillon, J.-M., Choukroun, G., & Massy, Z. A. (2013). Cognitive disorders and dementia in CKD: the neglected kidney-brain axis. Journal of the American Society of Nephrology, 24(3), 353–363. https://doi.org/10.1681/ASN.2012050536
Feng, J., Lu, X., Wang, S., & Li, H. (2021). The assessment of cognitive impairment in maintenance hemodialysis patients and the relationship between cognitive impairment and depressive symptoms. Seminars In Dialysis. https://doi.org/10.1111/sdi.13031
Wang, P., Zhao, Y., Zhang, Y. Q., Li, N., Guo, M. J., & Ji, H. (2021). The mediating effect of coping style in the relationship between hope level and benefit finding in patients with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Journal of Nursing Science, 36(15), 74–76 + 85.
Boumans, N. P. G., & Landeweerd, J. A. (1992). The role of social support and coping behaviour in nursing work: Main or buffering effect? Work & Stress, 6(2), 191–202. https://doi.org/10.1080/02678379208260353
Newby, J., Robins, L., Wilhelm, K., Smith, J., Fletcher, T., Gillis, I.,.. . Andrews, G. (2017). Web-Based Cognitive Behavior Therapy for Depression in People With Diabetes Mellitus: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 19(5), e157. https://doi.org/10.2196/jmir.7274
Bosman, J. T., Bood, Z. M., Scherer-Rath, M., Dörr, H., Christophe, N., Sprangers, M. A. G., & van Laarhoven, H. W. M. (2021). The effects of art therapy on anxiety, depression, and quality of life in adults with cancer: a systematic literature review. Supportive Care In Cancer: Official Journal of the Multinational Association of Supportive Care In Cancer, 29(5), 2289–2298. https://doi:10.1007/s00520-020-05869-0
Newland, P., & Bettencourt, B. A. (2020). Effectiveness of mindfulness-based art therapy for symptoms of anxiety, depression, and fatigue: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Complementary Therapies In Clinical Practice, 41, 101246. https://doi:10.1016/j.ctcp.2020.101246
Thoma, N., Pilecki, B., & McKay, D. (2015). Contemporary Cognitive Behavior Therapy: A Review of Theory, History, and Evidence. Psychodynamic Psychiatry, 43(3), 423–461. https://doi:10.1521/pdps.2015.43.3.423
Liu, Z., Qiao, D., Xu, Y., Zhao, W., Yang, Y., Wen, D.,.. . Xu, Y. (2021). The Efficacy of Computerized Cognitive Behavioral Therapy for Depressive and Anxiety Symptoms in Patients With COVID-19: Randomized Controlled Trial. Journal of Medical Internet Research, 23(5), e26883. https://doi.org/10.2196/26883
Wu, R. Q., & Yang, L. (2021). The influence of five-element music therapy of TCM on anxiety and depression and quality of life in hemodialysis patients. Henan Traditional Chinese Medicine, 41(12), 1890–1894. https://doi.org/10.16367/j.issn.1003-5028.2021.12.0425
Fu, J. X., Wang, A. M., Zhou, Y. P., Lin, Q. L., &Li, Q. C. (2021). Effect of baduanjin exercise on sleep quality and negative emotion in maintenance hemodialysis patient. Journal of Nursing Administration, 21(04):285–290. https://doi.org/10.3969/j.issn.1671-315x.2021.04.012