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.

Pretreatment fertility counseling and fertility preservation improve quality of life in reproductive age women with cancer.

Abstract: BACKGROUND: The post-treatment quality of life (QOL) impacts of receiving precancer-treatment infertility counseling and of pursuing fertility preservation have not been described in large-scale studies of reproductive age women with cancer. METHODS: In total, 1041 women who were diagnosed between ages 18 and 40 years responded to a retrospective survey and reported whether they received infertility counseling before cancer treatment and whether they took action to preserve fertility. Five cancer types were included: leukemia, Hodgkin disease, non-Hodgkin lymphoma, breast cancer, and gastrointestinal cancer. Validated QOL scales were used: the Decision Regret Score, the Satisfaction with Life Scale (SWLS), and the brief World Health Organization QOL questionnaire. RESULTS: Overall, 560 women (61%) who received treatment that potentially could affect fertility were counseled by the oncology team, 45 (5%) were counseled by fertility specialists, and 36 (4%) took action to preserve fertility. Pretreatment infertility counseling by a fertility specialist and an oncologist resulted in lower regret than counseling by an oncologist alone (8.4 vs 11.0; P < .0001). The addition of fertility preservation (6.6 vs 11.0; P < .0001) also was associated with even lower regret scores than counseling by an oncologist alone. Further improvements also were observed in SWLS scores with the addition of fertility specialist counseling (23.0 vs 19.8; P = .09) or preserving fertility (24.0 vs 19.0; P = .05). CONCLUSIONS: Receiving specialized counseling about reproductive loss and pursuing fertility preservation is associated with less regret and greater QOL for survivors, yet few patients are exposed to this potential benefit. Women of reproductive age should have expert counseling and should be given the opportunity to make active decisions about preserving fertility. Cancer 2011;. © 2011 American Cancer Society.

The Association of Sleep-Disordered Breathing and Sleep Symptoms with Quality of Life in the Sleep Heart Health Study QUALITY OF LIFE IN THE SLEEP HEART HEALTH STUDY

Abstract: This study assessed the extent to which sleep-disordered breathing (SDB), difficulty initiating and maintaining sleep (DIMS), and excessive daytime sleepiness (EDS) were associated with impairment of quality of life (QoL) using the SF-36. Participants (n=5,816; mean age=63 years; 52.5% women) were enrolled in the nation-wide population-based Sleep Heart Health Study (SHHS) implemented to investigate sleep-disordered breathing as a risk factor in the development of cardiovascular disease. Each transformed SF-36 scale was analyzed inde- pendently using multiple logistic regression analysis with sleep and other potential confounding variables (e.g., age, ethnicity) included as inde- pendent variables. Men (11.6%) were significantly more likely to have SDB compared to women (5.6%), while women (42.4%) were significant- ly more likely to report DIMS than men (32.5%). Vitality was the sole SF-36 scale to have a linear association with the clinical categories of SDB (mild, moderate, severe SDB). However, individuals with severe SDB indicated significantly poorer QoL on several SF-36 scales. Both DIMS and EDS were strongly associated with reduced QoL even after adjusting for confounding variables for both sexes. Findings suggest 1) mild to moderate SDB is associated with reduced vitality, while severe SDB is more broadly associated with poorer QoL, 2) subjective sleep symptoms are comprehensively associated with poorer QoL, and 3) SF-36 mean score profiles for SDB and sleep symptoms are equivalent to other chron- ic diseases in the U.S. general population.

Estimating clinically significant differences in quality of life outcomes.

Abstract: Objective: This report extracts important considerations for determining and applying clinically significant differences in quality of life (QOL) measures from six published articles written by 30 international experts in the field of QOL assessment and evaluation. The original six articles were presented at the Symposium on Clinical Significance of Quality of Life Measures in Cancer Patients at the Mayo Clinic in April 2002 and subsequently were published in Mayo Clinic Proceedings. Principal findings: Specific examples and formulas are given for anchor-based methods, as well as distribution-based methods that correspond to known or relevant anchors to determine important differences in QOL measures. Important prerequisites for clinical significance associated with instrument selection, responsiveness, and the reporting of QOL trial results are provided. We also discuss estimating the number needed to treat (NNT) relative to clinically significant thresholds. Finally, we provide a rationale for applying group-derived standards to individual assessments. Conclusions: While no single method for determining clinical significance is unilaterally endorsed, the investigation and full reporting of multiple methods for establishing clinically significant change levels for a QOL measure, and greater direct involvement of clinicians in clinical significance studies are strongly encouraged.

Development of a quality of life index for patients with cancer.

Abstract: This study developed an instrument to measure the quality of life (QOL) of patients with cancer that would account for individual values, as well as satisfaction. The sample consisted of patients with breast cancer (n = 111) listed in the tumor registry of a major hospital. Ferrans and Power's Quality of Life Index (QLI) was modified based on an extensive review of the oncology literature, which supported content validity. The findings supported the internal consistency reliability of the entire QLI (alpha = 0.95) and of the four subscales: health and functioning, socioeconomic, psychological/spiritual, and family (alphas = 0.90, 0.84, 0.93, and 0.66, respectively). Support for concurrent validity was provided by a strong correlation (r = 0.80) between the QLI and a measure of satisfaction with life. Support for construct validity was provided by significantly higher mean QOL scores for subjects who had less pain, less depression, and were coping better with stress, using the known group technique. The positive results obtained from this assessment and the fact that many patients can complete the QLI independently are important variables to consider when health professionals are selecting instruments for research and practice.

Exercise in cancer survivors: an overview of research.

Abstract: Purpose: To provide an overview of research that has examined exercise in cancer survivors including recently completed trials at the University of Alberta. Methods: A search of published studies using electronic data bases and previous review articles. The review is divided into breast and nonbreast cancers, during and after treatment, and trials from the University of Alberta. Results: Forty-seven published studies were located and summarized plus four trials from the University of Alberta. Almost all studies showed beneficial effects of exercise in breast and nonbreast cancer groups alike as well as during and after cancer treatment. Conclusion: Preliminary research suggests that exercise may be an effective intervention for enhancing quality of life (QOL) in cancer survivors. The effects of exercise on biomarkers, cancer recurrence, other diseases, and overall survival are unknown. Future research is needed to extend our knowledge beyond breast cancer survivors, conduct second generation studies in breast cancer survivors, examine mechanisms for changes in QOL, compare exercise with other QOL interventions, and examine biomarkers, cancer recurrence, and survival.