Quality of life

About: Quality of life is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 42912 publications have been published within this topic receiving 1198363 citations. The topic is also known as: life quality.

Oral health-related quality of life and periodontal status

Abstract: Background As patient-centered approaches become more popular, increasing attention is being given to assess the effects of various human health situations on an individual's overall quality of life (QoL). Measures have been used in dentistry to study the effects of orthodontic treatment and oral surgery, but so far little has been reported about the effects of periodontal disease. Objective This study assessed the impact of periodontal health status on QoL. Methods A subsample of 767 subjects were selected from a community study (n=1000) which investigated the association between psychological factors and clinical periodontal attachment level (CAL). The sample included subjects with full-mouth mean CAL 3 mm (high/severe periodontal attachment loss group). The subjects were requested to complete the Chinese short-form version of Oral Health Impact Profile (OHIP-14S) and a checklist of self-reported periodontal symptoms during the previous 12 months. Results A total of 727 subjects (95%) completed the questionnaire. The OHIP-14S and subscale scores were significantly associated with six of seven of the self-reported periodontal symptoms. A comparison of the mean OHIP-14S scores of the healthy/low and the high/severe periodontal attachment loss groups revealed significant differences in respect of the subscales of functional limitation, physical pain, psychological discomfort, physical and psychological disabilities. Conclusion This study demonstrates a significant association between oral health-related QoL and periodontal disease.

Evaluation of quality of life after laparoscopic surgery: evidence-based guidelines of the European Association for Endoscopic Surgery.

Abstract: Measuring health-related quality of life (QoL) after surgery is essential for decision making by patients, surgeons, and payers. The aim of this consensus conference was twofold. First, it was to determine for which diseases endoscopic surgery results in better postoperative QoL than open surgery. Second, it was to recommend QoL instruments for clinical research. An expert panel selected 12 conditions in which QoL and endoscopic surgery are important. For each condition, studies comparing endoscopic and open surgery in terms of QoL were identified. The expert panel reached consensus on the relative benefits of endoscopic surgery and recommended generic and disease-specific QoL instruments for use in clinical research. Randomized trials indicate that QoL improves earlier after endoscopic than open surgery for gastroesophageal reflux disease (GERD), cholecystolithiasis, colorectal cancer, inguinal hernia, obesity (gastric bypass), and uterine disorders that require hysterectomy. For spleen, prostate, malignant kidney, benign colorectal, and benign non-GERD esophageal diseases, evidence from nonrandomized trials supports the use of laparoscopic surgery. However, many studies failed to collect long-term results, used nonvalidated questionnaires, or measured QoL components only incompletely. The following QoL instruments can be recommended: for benign esophageal and gallbladder disease, the GIQLI or the QOLRAD together with SF-36 or the PGWB; for obesity surgery, the IWQOL-Lite with the SF-36; for colorectal cancer, the FACT-C or the EORTC QLQ-C30/CR38; for inguinal and renal surgery, the VAS for pain with the SF-36 (or the EORTC QLQ-C30 in case of malignancy); and after hysterectomy, the SF-36 together with an evaluation of urinary and sexual function. Laparoscopic surgery provides better postoperative QoL in many clinical situations. Researchers would improve the quality of future studies by using validated QoL instruments such as those recommended here.

Quality of life four years after acute myocardial infarction: short form 36 scores compared with a normal population

Abstract: Objectives—To assess the impact of myocardial infarction on quality of life in four year survivors compared to data from “community norms”, and to determine factors associated with a poor quality of life. Design—Cohort study based on the Nottingham heart attack register. Setting—Two district general hospitals serving a defined urban/rural population. Subjects—All patients admitted with acute myocardial infarction during 1992 and alive at a median of four years. Main outcome measures—Short form 36 (SF 36) domain and overall scores. Results—Of 900 patients with an acute myocardial infarction in 1992, there were 476 patients alive and capable of responding to a questionnaire in 1997. The response rate was 424 (89.1%). Compared to age and sex adjusted normative data, patients aged under 65 years exhibited impairment in all eight domains, the largest diVerences being in physical functioning (mean diVerence 20 points), role physical (mean diVerence 23 points), and general health (mean diVerence 19 points). In patients over 65 years mean domain scores were similar to community norms. Multiple regression analysis revealed that impaired quality of life was closely associated with inability to return to work through ill health, a need for coronary revascularisation, the use of anxiolytics, hypnotics or inhalers, the need for two or more angina drugs, a frequency of chest pain one or more times per week, and a Rose dyspnoea score of> 2. Conclusions—The SF 36 provides valuable additional information for the practising clinician. Compared to community norms the greatest impact on quality of life is seen in patients of working age. Impaired quality of life was reported by patients unfit for work, those with angina and dyspnoea, patients with coexistent lung disease, and those with anxiety and sleep disturbances. Improving quality of life after myocardial infarction remains a challenge for physicians. (Heart 1999;81:352‐358)

Effect of early and systematic integration of palliative care in patients with advanced cancer: a randomised controlled trial

Abstract: Summary Background The benefit of early integration of palliative care into oncological care is suggested to be due to increased psychosocial support. In Belgium, psychosocial care is part of standard oncological care. The aim of this randomised controlled trial is to examine whether early and systematic integration of palliative care alongside standard psychosocial oncological care provides added benefit compared with usual care. Methods In this randomised controlled trial, eligible patients were 18 years or older, and had advanced cancer due to a solid tumour, an European Cooperative Oncology Group performance status of 0–2, an estimated life expectancy of 12 months, and were within the first 12 weeks of a new primary tumour or had a diagnosis of progression. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1), by block design using a computer-generated sequence, either to early and systematic integration of palliative care into oncological care, or standard oncological care alone in a setting where all patients are offered multidisciplinary oncology care by medical specialists, psychologists, social workers, dieticians, and specialist nurses. The primary endpoint was change in global health status/quality of life scale assessed by the European Organisation for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 items (EORTC QLQ C30) at 12 weeks. The McGill Quality of Life Questionnaire (MQOL), which includes the additional existential wellbeing dimension, was also used. Analysis was by intention to treat. This trial is ongoing, but closed for accrual, and is registered with ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT01865396. Findings From April 29, 2013, to Feb 29, 2016, we screened 468 patients for eligibility, of whom 186 were enrolled and randomly assigned to the early and systematic palliative care group (92 patients) or the standard oncological care group (94). Compliance at 12 weeks was 71% (65 patients) in the intervention group versus 72% (68) in the control group. The overall quality of life score at 12 weeks, by the EORTC QLQ C30, was 54·39 (95% CI 49·23–59·56) in the standard oncological care group versus 61·98 (57·02–66·95) in the early and systematic palliative care group (difference 7·60 [95% CI 0·59–14·60]; p=0·03); and by the MQOL Single Item Scale, 5·94 (95% CI 5·50–6·39) in the standard oncological care group versus 7·05 (6·59–7·50) in the early and systematic palliative care group (difference 1·11 [95% CI 0·49–1·73]; p=0.0006). Interpretation The findings of this study show that a model of early and systematic integration of palliative care in oncological care increases the quality of life of patients with advanced cancer. Our findings also show that early and systematic integration of palliative care is more beneficial for patients with advanced cancer than palliative care consultations offered on demand, even when psychosocial support has already been offered. Through integration of care, oncologists and specialised palliative care teams should work together to enhance the quality of life of patients with advanced cancer. Funding Research Foundation Flanders, Flemish Cancer Society (Kom Op Tegen Kanker).