目的 比较健康调查简表(the MOS item short from health survey,SF-36)和欧洲癌症研究和治疗组织肿瘤肺癌患者生存质量量表(the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core 30 Questionnaire,E...目的 比较健康调查简表(the MOS item short from health survey,SF-36)和欧洲癌症研究和治疗组织肿瘤肺癌患者生存质量量表(the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core 30 Questionnaire,EORTC QLQ-LC43)在肺癌患者生活质量测定中的应用效果。方法 选取2020年9月—2022年6月158例肺癌患者作为研究对象,分别采用SF-36量表和EORTC QLQ-LC43量表调查受试对象的生活质量,采用Pearson线性相关性分析比较两种量表不同维度评分之间的相关性,以Karnofsky评分(KPS评分)功能状态评分作为效标,比较两种生存质量量表的相关性及效度。结果 SF-36量表总克朗巴赫系数为0.766,分量表克朗巴赫系数为0.493~0.849。SF-36量表的躯体功能、躯体角色、躯体疼痛、情感职能、社会活动、一般健康等6个分量表分别与EORTC QLQ-LC43量表的躯体功能、角色功能、疼痛、情绪功能、社会功能、整体生活质量的6个分量表对应,其相关系数为0.784~0.842,相关性差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)。上述对应的分量表具有中等程度的一致性(Kappa值> 0.4)。不同临床分期分组中,肺癌患者SF-36各个维度得分与肿瘤分期显著相关,肿瘤分期越晚,生存质量得分越低(P<0.001)。肺癌患者SF-36各个维度得分与患者的体力状态得分显著相关,体力状态越差,生存质量得分越低(P <0.001)。结论 与EORTC QLQ-LC43量表相比,SF-36量表在评价肺癌患者生活质量方面具有较高的一致性和区分能力,可以作为EORTC QLQ-LC43量表的替代。展开更多
目的探讨康复期锻炼对乳腺癌患者生命质量的影响。方法采用横断面研究方法,整群抽样上海癌症康复俱乐部1 956名女性乳腺癌康复期患者进行问卷调查,调查问卷采用欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生命质量量表(quality of life questionnaire-core ...目的探讨康复期锻炼对乳腺癌患者生命质量的影响。方法采用横断面研究方法,整群抽样上海癌症康复俱乐部1 956名女性乳腺癌康复期患者进行问卷调查,调查问卷采用欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生命质量量表(quality of life questionnaire-core 30,EORTC QLQ-C30)和乳腺癌生存质量量表(quality of life questionnaire-breast cancer module 23,QLQ-BR23)。结果 QLQ-BR23的信度和效度分别为0.898和0.904,EORTC QLQ-C30的信度和效度分别为0.988和0.989;对于QLQ-BR23量表,康复锻炼、锻炼次数和生命质量均无统计学意义。但是参与康复锻炼和锻炼次数≥5次/周患者的功能症状总得分高于未参加康复锻炼和康复锻炼<5次/周患者。对于EORTC QLQ-C30量表,通过调整社会人口学等因素,参加康复锻炼患者的躯体功能及总体健康状况得分均显著高于不参加体育锻炼患者(P<0.05,PAdjusted<0.05);康复锻炼≥5次/周患者的5个功能维度及总体健康状况得分均高于康复锻炼<5次/周患者,但只有躯体功能差异有统计学意义(P<0.05,PAdjusted<0.05)。结论参加康复锻炼的乳腺癌患者总体生命质量高于未参加锻炼者,康复锻炼对提高乳腺癌患者的生命质量有积极影响。展开更多
Objective:To analyze whether the European Organisation for Treatment and Research of Cancer(EORTC)Quality of Life Questionnaires(QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29)complement the low anterior resection of rectum syndrome(LARS)score...Objective:To analyze whether the European Organisation for Treatment and Research of Cancer(EORTC)Quality of Life Questionnaires(QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29)complement the low anterior resection of rectum syndrome(LARS)score in evaluating the quality of life of patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic rectal cancer surgery.Methods:Initially,335 patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic rectal cancer surgery were randomly selected at Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital,Zhejiang University School of Medicine from June 2013 to September 2020.All the patients took the questionnaires of LARS score,QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29.Totally,questionnaires filled out by 224 patients were qualified after screening.Patients were divided into three groups according to LARS score:No LARS group(score 0-20),minor LARS group(score 21-29)and major LARS group(score 30-42).The scores of QLQ-C30 as well as QLQ-CR29 among the three groups were compared.Results:Major,minor and no LARS groups had 140 cases,40 cases and 44 cases respectively.In the scales of QLQ-C30,significant differences were discovered in global quality of life,physical function,role function,emotional function,cognitive function,social function,fatigue,pain,dyspnea,sleep disturbance,constipation and diarrhea between the no and major LARS groups(p<0.05).While the differences were only found in global quality of life and diarrhea between the minor and major LARS groups(p<0.05).In QLQ-CR29,scales of urinary frequency,blood and mucus in stool,body image,flatulence,fecal incontinence,sore skin,stool frequency,embarrassment,impotence,abdominal pain,buttock pain,bloating,dry mouth,hair loss,taste,anxiety and weight,had significant differences between the no and major LARS groups(p<0.05).Only six scales,ie blood and mucus in stool,flatulence,fecal incontinence,stool frequency,embarrassment and dysuria had significant differences between the minor and major LARS groups(p<0.05).Conclusion:For patients following laparoscopic or robotic low anal sphincter preserving surgery,LARS score,QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29 scores are consistent in overall trends.To guide disease evaluation and individualized treatment,as well as to evaluate efficacy,we suggest getting pre-and post-operative LARS scores incorporating QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29 scores as a comprehensive evaluation system.展开更多
文摘目的 比较健康调查简表(the MOS item short from health survey,SF-36)和欧洲癌症研究和治疗组织肿瘤肺癌患者生存质量量表(the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Core 30 Questionnaire,EORTC QLQ-LC43)在肺癌患者生活质量测定中的应用效果。方法 选取2020年9月—2022年6月158例肺癌患者作为研究对象,分别采用SF-36量表和EORTC QLQ-LC43量表调查受试对象的生活质量,采用Pearson线性相关性分析比较两种量表不同维度评分之间的相关性,以Karnofsky评分(KPS评分)功能状态评分作为效标,比较两种生存质量量表的相关性及效度。结果 SF-36量表总克朗巴赫系数为0.766,分量表克朗巴赫系数为0.493~0.849。SF-36量表的躯体功能、躯体角色、躯体疼痛、情感职能、社会活动、一般健康等6个分量表分别与EORTC QLQ-LC43量表的躯体功能、角色功能、疼痛、情绪功能、社会功能、整体生活质量的6个分量表对应,其相关系数为0.784~0.842,相关性差异有统计学意义(P<0.001)。上述对应的分量表具有中等程度的一致性(Kappa值> 0.4)。不同临床分期分组中,肺癌患者SF-36各个维度得分与肿瘤分期显著相关,肿瘤分期越晚,生存质量得分越低(P<0.001)。肺癌患者SF-36各个维度得分与患者的体力状态得分显著相关,体力状态越差,生存质量得分越低(P <0.001)。结论 与EORTC QLQ-LC43量表相比,SF-36量表在评价肺癌患者生活质量方面具有较高的一致性和区分能力,可以作为EORTC QLQ-LC43量表的替代。
文摘目的探讨康复期锻炼对乳腺癌患者生命质量的影响。方法采用横断面研究方法,整群抽样上海癌症康复俱乐部1 956名女性乳腺癌康复期患者进行问卷调查,调查问卷采用欧洲癌症研究与治疗组织生命质量量表(quality of life questionnaire-core 30,EORTC QLQ-C30)和乳腺癌生存质量量表(quality of life questionnaire-breast cancer module 23,QLQ-BR23)。结果 QLQ-BR23的信度和效度分别为0.898和0.904,EORTC QLQ-C30的信度和效度分别为0.988和0.989;对于QLQ-BR23量表,康复锻炼、锻炼次数和生命质量均无统计学意义。但是参与康复锻炼和锻炼次数≥5次/周患者的功能症状总得分高于未参加康复锻炼和康复锻炼<5次/周患者。对于EORTC QLQ-C30量表,通过调整社会人口学等因素,参加康复锻炼患者的躯体功能及总体健康状况得分均显著高于不参加体育锻炼患者(P<0.05,PAdjusted<0.05);康复锻炼≥5次/周患者的5个功能维度及总体健康状况得分均高于康复锻炼<5次/周患者,但只有躯体功能差异有统计学意义(P<0.05,PAdjusted<0.05)。结论参加康复锻炼的乳腺癌患者总体生命质量高于未参加锻炼者,康复锻炼对提高乳腺癌患者的生命质量有积极影响。
文摘Objective:To analyze whether the European Organisation for Treatment and Research of Cancer(EORTC)Quality of Life Questionnaires(QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29)complement the low anterior resection of rectum syndrome(LARS)score in evaluating the quality of life of patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic rectal cancer surgery.Methods:Initially,335 patients who underwent laparoscopic or robotic rectal cancer surgery were randomly selected at Sir Run Run Shaw Hospital,Zhejiang University School of Medicine from June 2013 to September 2020.All the patients took the questionnaires of LARS score,QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29.Totally,questionnaires filled out by 224 patients were qualified after screening.Patients were divided into three groups according to LARS score:No LARS group(score 0-20),minor LARS group(score 21-29)and major LARS group(score 30-42).The scores of QLQ-C30 as well as QLQ-CR29 among the three groups were compared.Results:Major,minor and no LARS groups had 140 cases,40 cases and 44 cases respectively.In the scales of QLQ-C30,significant differences were discovered in global quality of life,physical function,role function,emotional function,cognitive function,social function,fatigue,pain,dyspnea,sleep disturbance,constipation and diarrhea between the no and major LARS groups(p<0.05).While the differences were only found in global quality of life and diarrhea between the minor and major LARS groups(p<0.05).In QLQ-CR29,scales of urinary frequency,blood and mucus in stool,body image,flatulence,fecal incontinence,sore skin,stool frequency,embarrassment,impotence,abdominal pain,buttock pain,bloating,dry mouth,hair loss,taste,anxiety and weight,had significant differences between the no and major LARS groups(p<0.05).Only six scales,ie blood and mucus in stool,flatulence,fecal incontinence,stool frequency,embarrassment and dysuria had significant differences between the minor and major LARS groups(p<0.05).Conclusion:For patients following laparoscopic or robotic low anal sphincter preserving surgery,LARS score,QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29 scores are consistent in overall trends.To guide disease evaluation and individualized treatment,as well as to evaluate efficacy,we suggest getting pre-and post-operative LARS scores incorporating QLQ-C30 and QLQ-CR29 scores as a comprehensive evaluation system.
