Cargando…
Measuring quality of life in people living with and beyond cancer in the UK
PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to identify the most appropriate measure of quality of life (QoL) for patients living with and beyond cancer. METHODS: One hundred eighty-two people attending cancer clinics in Central London at various stages post-treatment, completed a series of QoL measures: FAC...
Autores principales: | , , , , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Springer Berlin Heidelberg
2021
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8410707/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33783624 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-021-06105-z |
_version_ | 1783747156862042112 |
---|---|
author | Moschopoulou, Elisavet Deane, Jennifer Duncan, Morvwen Ismail, Sharif A. Moriarty, Sophie Sarker, Shah-Jalal White, Peter Korszun, Ania |
author_facet | Moschopoulou, Elisavet Deane, Jennifer Duncan, Morvwen Ismail, Sharif A. Moriarty, Sophie Sarker, Shah-Jalal White, Peter Korszun, Ania |
author_sort | Moschopoulou, Elisavet |
collection | PubMed |
description | PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to identify the most appropriate measure of quality of life (QoL) for patients living with and beyond cancer. METHODS: One hundred eighty-two people attending cancer clinics in Central London at various stages post-treatment, completed a series of QoL measures: FACT-G, EORTC QLQ-C30 , IOCv2 (positive and negative subscales) and WEMWBS, a wellbeing measure. These measures were chosen as the commonest measures used in previous research. Correlation tests were used to assess the association between scales. Participants were also asked about pertinence and ease of completion. RESULTS: There was a significant positive correlation between the four domain scores of the two health-related QoL measures (.32 ≤ r ≤ .72, P < .001), and a significant large negative correlation between these and the negative IOCv2 subscale scores (− .39 ≤ r ≤ − .63, P < .001). There was a significant moderate positive correlation between positive IOCv2 subscale and WEMWBS scores (r = .35, P < .001). However, neither the FACT-G nor the EORTC showed any significant correlation with the positive IOCv2 subscale. Participants rated all measures similarly with regards to pertinence and ease of use. CONCLUSION: There was little to choose between FACT-G, EORTC, and the negative IOC scales, any of which may be used to measure QoL. However, the two IOCv2 subscales capture unique aspects of QoL compared to the other measures. The IOCv2 can be used to identify those cancer survivors who would benefit from interventions to improve their QoL and to target specific needs thereby providing more holistic and personalised care beyond cancer treatment. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-8410707 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2021 |
publisher | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-84107072021-09-22 Measuring quality of life in people living with and beyond cancer in the UK Moschopoulou, Elisavet Deane, Jennifer Duncan, Morvwen Ismail, Sharif A. Moriarty, Sophie Sarker, Shah-Jalal White, Peter Korszun, Ania Support Care Cancer Original Article PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to identify the most appropriate measure of quality of life (QoL) for patients living with and beyond cancer. METHODS: One hundred eighty-two people attending cancer clinics in Central London at various stages post-treatment, completed a series of QoL measures: FACT-G, EORTC QLQ-C30 , IOCv2 (positive and negative subscales) and WEMWBS, a wellbeing measure. These measures were chosen as the commonest measures used in previous research. Correlation tests were used to assess the association between scales. Participants were also asked about pertinence and ease of completion. RESULTS: There was a significant positive correlation between the four domain scores of the two health-related QoL measures (.32 ≤ r ≤ .72, P < .001), and a significant large negative correlation between these and the negative IOCv2 subscale scores (− .39 ≤ r ≤ − .63, P < .001). There was a significant moderate positive correlation between positive IOCv2 subscale and WEMWBS scores (r = .35, P < .001). However, neither the FACT-G nor the EORTC showed any significant correlation with the positive IOCv2 subscale. Participants rated all measures similarly with regards to pertinence and ease of use. CONCLUSION: There was little to choose between FACT-G, EORTC, and the negative IOC scales, any of which may be used to measure QoL. However, the two IOCv2 subscales capture unique aspects of QoL compared to the other measures. The IOCv2 can be used to identify those cancer survivors who would benefit from interventions to improve their QoL and to target specific needs thereby providing more holistic and personalised care beyond cancer treatment. Springer Berlin Heidelberg 2021-03-30 2021 /pmc/articles/PMC8410707/ /pubmed/33783624 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-021-06105-z Text en © The Author(s) 2021 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 | Original Article Moschopoulou, Elisavet Deane, Jennifer Duncan, Morvwen Ismail, Sharif A. Moriarty, Sophie Sarker, Shah-Jalal White, Peter Korszun, Ania Measuring quality of life in people living with and beyond cancer in the UK |
title | Measuring quality of life in people living with and beyond cancer in the UK |
title_full | Measuring quality of life in people living with and beyond cancer in the UK |
title_fullStr | Measuring quality of life in people living with and beyond cancer in the UK |
title_full_unstemmed | Measuring quality of life in people living with and beyond cancer in the UK |
title_short | Measuring quality of life in people living with and beyond cancer in the UK |
title_sort | measuring quality of life in people living with and beyond cancer in the uk |
topic | Original Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8410707/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/33783624 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s00520-021-06105-z |
work_keys_str_mv | AT moschopoulouelisavet measuringqualityoflifeinpeoplelivingwithandbeyondcancerintheuk AT deanejennifer measuringqualityoflifeinpeoplelivingwithandbeyondcancerintheuk AT duncanmorvwen measuringqualityoflifeinpeoplelivingwithandbeyondcancerintheuk AT ismailsharifa measuringqualityoflifeinpeoplelivingwithandbeyondcancerintheuk AT moriartysophie measuringqualityoflifeinpeoplelivingwithandbeyondcancerintheuk AT sarkershahjalal measuringqualityoflifeinpeoplelivingwithandbeyondcancerintheuk AT whitepeter measuringqualityoflifeinpeoplelivingwithandbeyondcancerintheuk AT korszunania measuringqualityoflifeinpeoplelivingwithandbeyondcancerintheuk AT measuringqualityoflifeinpeoplelivingwithandbeyondcancerintheuk |