Corinna Bergelt1, Uwe Koch, Corinna Petersen. 1. Institute of Medical Psychology, Center for Psychosocial Medicine, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistr. 52, S 35, 20246 Hamburg, Germany. bergelt@uke.uni-hamburg.de
Abstract
OBJECTIVES: Cancer affects patients' quality of life (QOL) but might also influence their partners' QOL. We investigated QOL in partners of patients with different cancer types and examined potential predictors of partners' QOL. METHODS: Three hundred seventy-three partners completed the SF-36 QOL questionnaire. Descriptive statistics, t-tests and linear regressions were performed. Potential predictors of partners' QOL included sociodemographic (sex, age, income), psychosocial (social support, quality of partner relationship, patient's QOL) and clinical variables (tumour stage, treatment, time since diagnosis). RESULTS: Male partners reported better QOL than female partners on most SF-36 subscales. Both male and female partners reported significantly lower mental QOL than the norm population. Higher quality of the relationship predicted higher mental QOL in partners of patients with cancers of digestive organs (P = 0.039) and breast cancer patients' partners (P = 0.001). Higher mental QOL of the patient predicted higher physical (P = 0.012) and mental QOL (P = 0.011) in partners of breast cancer patients. For partners of patients with cancers of the male genital organs, none of the variables in the model was of predictive value. CONCLUSION: Mental, rather than physical, QOL of partners was impaired. Stage and other clinical variables of the patient did not influence partners' mental or physical QOL.
OBJECTIVES:Cancer affects patients' quality of life (QOL) but might also influence their partners' QOL. We investigated QOL in partners of patients with different cancer types and examined potential predictors of partners' QOL. METHODS: Three hundred seventy-three partners completed the SF-36 QOL questionnaire. Descriptive statistics, t-tests and linear regressions were performed. Potential predictors of partners' QOL included sociodemographic (sex, age, income), psychosocial (social support, quality of partner relationship, patient's QOL) and clinical variables (tumour stage, treatment, time since diagnosis). RESULTS: Male partners reported better QOL than female partners on most SF-36 subscales. Both male and female partners reported significantly lower mental QOL than the norm population. Higher quality of the relationship predicted higher mental QOL in partners of patients with cancers of digestive organs (P = 0.039) and breast cancerpatients' partners (P = 0.001). Higher mental QOL of the patient predicted higher physical (P = 0.012) and mental QOL (P = 0.011) in partners of breast cancerpatients. For partners of patients with cancers of the male genital organs, none of the variables in the model was of predictive value. CONCLUSION: Mental, rather than physical, QOL of partners was impaired. Stage and other clinical variables of the patient did not influence partners' mental or physical QOL.
Authors: Jeremy W Couper; Sidney Bloch; Anthony Love; Gillian Duchesne; Michelle Macvean; David W Kissane Journal: Med J Aust Date: 2006-10-16 Impact factor: 7.738
Authors: Marrit A Tuinman; Joke Fleer; Harald J Hoekstra; Dirk Th Sleijfer; Josette E H M Hoekstra-Weebers Journal: Eur J Cancer Date: 2004-07 Impact factor: 9.162
Authors: Florien W Boele; Jan J Heimans; Neil K Aaronson; Martin J B Taphoorn; Tjeerd J Postma; Jaap C Reijneveld; Martin Klein Journal: J Neurooncol Date: 2013-07-04 Impact factor: 4.130
Authors: Cornelie D Andela; Jitske Tiemensma; Adrian A Kaptein; Margreet Scharloo; Alberto M Pereira; Noëlle Ga Kamminga; Nienke R Biermasz Journal: J Health Psychol Date: 2017-03-01
Authors: Bente Birkeland; Bente M Weimand; Torleif Ruud; Magnhild M Høie; John-Kåre Vederhus Journal: Health Qual Life Outcomes Date: 2017-08-30 Impact factor: 3.186
Authors: Daniela Bodschwinna; Inga Lorenz; Natalie Bauereiss; Harald Gündel; Harald Baumeister; Klaus Hoenig Journal: BMJ Open Date: 2020-10-05 Impact factor: 2.692