Cargando…

Australian arm of the International Spinal Cord Injury (Aus-InSCI) Community Survey: 3. Drivers of quality of life in people with spinal cord injury

STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional population-based survey for the Australian cohort of the International Spinal Cord Injury (InSCI) Community Survey. OBJECTIVES: To differentiate subgroups of people with spinal cord injury (SCI) who self-report good and poor overall quality of life (QoL) using domains o...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Kifley, Annette, Arora, Mohit, Nunn, Andrew, Marshall, Ruth, Geraghty, Timothy, Weber, Gerard, Urquhart, Sue, Craig, Ashley, Cameron, Ian D., Middleton, James W.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2022
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10023557/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35995988
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41393-022-00845-3
_version_ 1784908908889899008
author Kifley, Annette
Arora, Mohit
Nunn, Andrew
Marshall, Ruth
Geraghty, Timothy
Weber, Gerard
Urquhart, Sue
Craig, Ashley
Cameron, Ian D.
Middleton, James W.
author_facet Kifley, Annette
Arora, Mohit
Nunn, Andrew
Marshall, Ruth
Geraghty, Timothy
Weber, Gerard
Urquhart, Sue
Craig, Ashley
Cameron, Ian D.
Middleton, James W.
author_sort Kifley, Annette
collection PubMed
description STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional population-based survey for the Australian cohort of the International Spinal Cord Injury (InSCI) Community Survey. OBJECTIVES: To differentiate subgroups of people with spinal cord injury (SCI) who self-report good and poor overall quality of life (QoL) using domains of the International Classification of Functioning (ICF), and to evaluate how these factors contribute to QoL when considered together, while controlling confounders. SETTING: Australian survey data from four state-wide SCI services, one government insurance agency, and three not-for-profit consumer organisations. METHODS: Explanatory factors for QoL were compared between participants reporting poor vs. good QoL. Path models estimated total, direct and mediated contributions from each explanatory factor to QoL ratings after accounting for confounders. RESULTS: Most participants (62%) reported good or very good QoL, 12% reported poor or very poor QoL. When explanatory factors were considered together, the strongest total effects on QoL involved social integration (+0.36 SDs), subjective social position (+0.29), secondary health condition burden (−0.28), activity/participation problem burden (−0.26), day-to-day assistance (−0.26), mental health (+0.18), pain (−0.16), self-efficacy (+0.15), vitality (+0.14) and environmental barriers (−0.11). Effects of social integration, mental health, vitality, self-efficacy, pain and activity/participation problems were partly or wholly direct. CONCLUSION: Opportunities to improve QoL in people with SCI exist at every level of the health system. Virtually all aspects of the ICF framework make a substantive difference to QoL outcomes. Social and psychological factors and ability to complete desired activities have key direct effects and influence effects of secondary health condition burden and environmental barriers.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-10023557
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2022
publisher Nature Publishing Group UK
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-100235572023-03-19 Australian arm of the International Spinal Cord Injury (Aus-InSCI) Community Survey: 3. Drivers of quality of life in people with spinal cord injury Kifley, Annette Arora, Mohit Nunn, Andrew Marshall, Ruth Geraghty, Timothy Weber, Gerard Urquhart, Sue Craig, Ashley Cameron, Ian D. Middleton, James W. Spinal Cord Article STUDY DESIGN: Cross-sectional population-based survey for the Australian cohort of the International Spinal Cord Injury (InSCI) Community Survey. OBJECTIVES: To differentiate subgroups of people with spinal cord injury (SCI) who self-report good and poor overall quality of life (QoL) using domains of the International Classification of Functioning (ICF), and to evaluate how these factors contribute to QoL when considered together, while controlling confounders. SETTING: Australian survey data from four state-wide SCI services, one government insurance agency, and three not-for-profit consumer organisations. METHODS: Explanatory factors for QoL were compared between participants reporting poor vs. good QoL. Path models estimated total, direct and mediated contributions from each explanatory factor to QoL ratings after accounting for confounders. RESULTS: Most participants (62%) reported good or very good QoL, 12% reported poor or very poor QoL. When explanatory factors were considered together, the strongest total effects on QoL involved social integration (+0.36 SDs), subjective social position (+0.29), secondary health condition burden (−0.28), activity/participation problem burden (−0.26), day-to-day assistance (−0.26), mental health (+0.18), pain (−0.16), self-efficacy (+0.15), vitality (+0.14) and environmental barriers (−0.11). Effects of social integration, mental health, vitality, self-efficacy, pain and activity/participation problems were partly or wholly direct. CONCLUSION: Opportunities to improve QoL in people with SCI exist at every level of the health system. Virtually all aspects of the ICF framework make a substantive difference to QoL outcomes. Social and psychological factors and ability to complete desired activities have key direct effects and influence effects of secondary health condition burden and environmental barriers. Nature Publishing Group UK 2022-08-22 2023 /pmc/articles/PMC10023557/ /pubmed/35995988 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41393-022-00845-3 Text en © The Author(s) 2022 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/. (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
spellingShingle Article
Kifley, Annette
Arora, Mohit
Nunn, Andrew
Marshall, Ruth
Geraghty, Timothy
Weber, Gerard
Urquhart, Sue
Craig, Ashley
Cameron, Ian D.
Middleton, James W.
Australian arm of the International Spinal Cord Injury (Aus-InSCI) Community Survey: 3. Drivers of quality of life in people with spinal cord injury
title Australian arm of the International Spinal Cord Injury (Aus-InSCI) Community Survey: 3. Drivers of quality of life in people with spinal cord injury
title_full Australian arm of the International Spinal Cord Injury (Aus-InSCI) Community Survey: 3. Drivers of quality of life in people with spinal cord injury
title_fullStr Australian arm of the International Spinal Cord Injury (Aus-InSCI) Community Survey: 3. Drivers of quality of life in people with spinal cord injury
title_full_unstemmed Australian arm of the International Spinal Cord Injury (Aus-InSCI) Community Survey: 3. Drivers of quality of life in people with spinal cord injury
title_short Australian arm of the International Spinal Cord Injury (Aus-InSCI) Community Survey: 3. Drivers of quality of life in people with spinal cord injury
title_sort australian arm of the international spinal cord injury (aus-insci) community survey: 3. drivers of quality of life in people with spinal cord injury
topic Article
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10023557/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/35995988
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41393-022-00845-3
work_keys_str_mv AT kifleyannette australianarmoftheinternationalspinalcordinjuryausinscicommunitysurvey3driversofqualityoflifeinpeoplewithspinalcordinjury
AT aroramohit australianarmoftheinternationalspinalcordinjuryausinscicommunitysurvey3driversofqualityoflifeinpeoplewithspinalcordinjury
AT nunnandrew australianarmoftheinternationalspinalcordinjuryausinscicommunitysurvey3driversofqualityoflifeinpeoplewithspinalcordinjury
AT marshallruth australianarmoftheinternationalspinalcordinjuryausinscicommunitysurvey3driversofqualityoflifeinpeoplewithspinalcordinjury
AT geraghtytimothy australianarmoftheinternationalspinalcordinjuryausinscicommunitysurvey3driversofqualityoflifeinpeoplewithspinalcordinjury
AT webergerard australianarmoftheinternationalspinalcordinjuryausinscicommunitysurvey3driversofqualityoflifeinpeoplewithspinalcordinjury
AT urquhartsue australianarmoftheinternationalspinalcordinjuryausinscicommunitysurvey3driversofqualityoflifeinpeoplewithspinalcordinjury
AT craigashley australianarmoftheinternationalspinalcordinjuryausinscicommunitysurvey3driversofqualityoflifeinpeoplewithspinalcordinjury
AT cameroniand australianarmoftheinternationalspinalcordinjuryausinscicommunitysurvey3driversofqualityoflifeinpeoplewithspinalcordinjury
AT middletonjamesw australianarmoftheinternationalspinalcordinjuryausinscicommunitysurvey3driversofqualityoflifeinpeoplewithspinalcordinjury