Journal of cranio-maxillo-facial surgery : official publication of the European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery · 2002
Importance-rating using the University of Washington quality of life questionnaire in patients treated by primary surgery for oral and oro-pharyngeal cancer.
Оценочное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Rogers S N, Laher S H, Overend L, Lowe D
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: There are now several validated and widely accepted head and neck cancer questionnaires. These record patients subjective levels of function and dysfunction, as well as symptoms related to their cancer and its treatment. One popular measure is the University of Washington head and neck cancer questionnaire (UW-QOL). Domain importance-ratings were added to the second version of the questionnaire, which was published in 1997. It is unique amongst head and neck cancer questionnaires in this respect.
AIM: The purpose of the study was to evaluate UW-QOL with particular reference to domain importance-rating. It was also the intention to investigate how the importance-ratings related to 'quality of life' and comment on the cumulative scoring of the questionnaire.
METHODS: Forty-eight patients with previously untreated oral or oro-pharyngeal cancer were recruited. All were treated by primary surgery. Questionnaires were completed pre-operatively, 6 months and 1 year post-operatively.
RESULTS: This study demonstrates a wide variation in importance-ratings. Both pre- and post-treatment there was a general lack of correlation between importance-rating and domain scores. At all time points, patients tended to rate speech, chewing and swallowing as more important than the other UW-QOL domains. The cumulative UW-QOL score correlated strongly with the new single item QOL question.
CONCLUSION: It remains unclear how best to incorporate importance-ratings into a single UW-QOL total score. However, for individual patients they can assist in setting priorities in treatment strategies.
AIM: The purpose of the study was to evaluate UW-QOL with particular reference to domain importance-rating. It was also the intention to investigate how the importance-ratings related to 'quality of life' and comment on the cumulative scoring of the questionnaire.
METHODS: Forty-eight patients with previously untreated oral or oro-pharyngeal cancer were recruited. All were treated by primary surgery. Questionnaires were completed pre-operatively, 6 months and 1 year post-operatively.
RESULTS: This study demonstrates a wide variation in importance-ratings. Both pre- and post-treatment there was a general lack of correlation between importance-rating and domain scores. At all time points, patients tended to rate speech, chewing and swallowing as more important than the other UW-QOL domains. The cumulative UW-QOL score correlated strongly with the new single item QOL question.
CONCLUSION: It remains unclear how best to incorporate importance-ratings into a single UW-QOL total score. However, for individual patients they can assist in setting priorities in treatment strategies.