Journal of hepato-biliary-pancreatic surgery · 2005
Comparison between a general and a disease-specific health-related quality-of-life questionnaire in patients after pancreatic surgery.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Scheingraber Stefan, Scheingraber Tanja, Brauckhoff Michael, Dralle Henning
Аннотация
BACKGROUND/PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to compare the short-form (SF-) 36 as a general instrument and the gastrointestinal quality of life index (GIQLI) as a disease-specific instrument in patients after pancreatic surgery.
METHODS: The questionnaires were sent to patients receiving pancreatic surgery over a time period of three years. Patients were compared with a normal population completing the SF-36 or reported normal-population values for the GIQLI. Agreement between the instruments was analyzed using Bland Altman plots.
RESULTS: A total of 98 patients were included, most of them undergoing a Whipple procedure (86%). The most frequent complaints were meteorism, obstipation, stool urgency, and stress incontinence in 9% of the patients. Whereas in almost every domain of the SF-36 the HRQL was impaired in comparison to the normal population, the GIQLI showed differences in only the domain emotions. Neither the SF-36 nor the GIQLI was different between patients with early and advanced cancer stages. The SF-36 had no agreement with the GIQLI.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of HRQL studies depend on the instruments which were used. Whereas a general instrument may detect factors such as comorbidity more accurately, disease-specific instruments have the advantage of better clinical interpretability.
METHODS: The questionnaires were sent to patients receiving pancreatic surgery over a time period of three years. Patients were compared with a normal population completing the SF-36 or reported normal-population values for the GIQLI. Agreement between the instruments was analyzed using Bland Altman plots.
RESULTS: A total of 98 patients were included, most of them undergoing a Whipple procedure (86%). The most frequent complaints were meteorism, obstipation, stool urgency, and stress incontinence in 9% of the patients. Whereas in almost every domain of the SF-36 the HRQL was impaired in comparison to the normal population, the GIQLI showed differences in only the domain emotions. Neither the SF-36 nor the GIQLI was different between patients with early and advanced cancer stages. The SF-36 had no agreement with the GIQLI.
CONCLUSIONS: The results of HRQL studies depend on the instruments which were used. Whereas a general instrument may detect factors such as comorbidity more accurately, disease-specific instruments have the advantage of better clinical interpretability.