| Literature DB >> 25991977 |
Adriana Di Donato Chaves1, Leandro de Araújo Pernambuco2, Patrícia Maria Mendes Balata3, Veridiana da Silva Santos4, Leilane Maria de Lima5, Síntia Ribeiro de Souza6, Hilton Justino da Silva7.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Among people affected by cancer, the impairment of quality of life of people affected by cancer can cause have devastating effects. The self-image of patients after post-laryngectomyzed patients may be find themselves compromised, affecting the quality of life in this population.Entities:
Keywords: communication; laryngectomy; protocols; quality of life
Year: 2012 PMID: 25991977 PMCID: PMC4399649 DOI: 10.7162/S1809-97772012000400009
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Int Arch Otorhinolaryngol ISSN: 1809-4864
Functional assessment of communication with patients after total laryngectomy. Adapted from Bertoncello (2004).
| Issues | Communication domains | Not at all true score | Somewhat true score | More true score | Very true score | Very much true score | Total | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n (%) | n (%) | n (%) | n (%) | n (%) | ||||
| 1. Before surgery my way of speaking was easy to understand | RS | 2 (13.3%) | 3 (20%) | 1 (6.7%) | 1 (6.7%) | 8 (53.3%) | 15 | |
| 2. My way of speaking interferes with my work | RS | NA | NA | 2 (13.3%) | NA | 1 (6.6%) | 3 | |
| 3. My way of speaking interferes in the relationship with my family | RF | 3 (20%) | 1 (6.7%) | 3 (20%) | 3 (20%) | 5 (33.3%) | 15 | |
| 4.My way of speaking interferes with the interaction with others | RS | 3 (20%) | − | 4 (26.7%) | 4 (26.7%) | 4 (26.7%) | 15 | |
| 5. I stopped attending parties (social gatherings) because of embarrassment caused by my manner of speaking | RS | 6 (40%) | − | 1 (6.7%) | 1 (6.7%) | 7 (46.7%) | 15 | |
| 6. When I go out I choose less crowded streets to not find known people | AP | 9 (60%) | 1 (6.7%) | − | − | 5 (33.3%) | 15 | |
| 7. My friends stopped coming to my house because of my difficulty speaking | AP | 6 (40%) | 1 (6.7%) | 3 (20%) | 2 (13.3%) | 3 (20%) | 15 | |
| 8. I do not answer people when they ring my doorbell | AP | 5 (33.3%) | 1 (6.7%) | − | 1 (6.7%) | 8 (53.3%) | 15 | |
| 9. I do not answer the phone due to my way of talking | AP | 3 (20%) | − | − | − | 12 (80%) | 15 | |
| 10. My way of speaking requires a greater respiratory effort | AM | − | − | − | 4 (26.7%) | 11 (73.3%) | 15 | |
| 11. My way of speaking requires greater effort | AP | − | − | − | 4 (26.7%) | 11 (73.3%) | 15 | |
| 12. My way of speaking requires greater motivation | AP | 1 (6.7%) | − | 3 (20%) | 4 (26.7%) | 7 (46.7%) | 15 | |
| 13. Talk me pain | AM | 9 ( 60%) | 1 (6.7%) | 1 (6.7%) | 1 (6.7%) | 3 (20%) | 15 | |
| 14. Talking causes me pain | AM | 4 (26.7%) | − | 4 (26.7%) | 3 (20%) | 3 (20%) | 14 | |
| 15. I have to make effort to talk | AM | 2 (13.3%) | 3 (20%) | 1 (6.7%) | 1 (6.7%) | 8 (53.3%) | 15 | |
| 16. Some people have trouble in understanding me | RS | 1 (6.7%) | 1 (6.7%) | 2 (13.3%) | 2 (13.3%) | 9 (60%) | 15 | |
| 17. Most of people have trouble in understanding me | RS | 1 (6.7%) | − | − | 5 (33.3%) | 9 (60%) | 15 | |
| 18. It seems that people are bothered with my way of talking | RS | 5 (33.3%) | 2 (13.3%) | 3 (20%) | 2 (13.3%) | 3 (20%) | 15 | |
| 19. My way of speaking embarrasses me | AP | 5 (33.3%) | − | 3 (20%) | 2 (13.3%) | 3 (20%) | 13 | |
| 20. I get annoyed when people ask me to repeat what I said | AP | 7 (46.7%) | 1 (6.7%) | 2 (13.3%) | 3 (20%) | 2 (13.3%) | 15 | |
| 21. My speech is the same after surgery | AM | 12 (80%) | 1 (6.7%) | − | − | 2 (13.3%) | 15 | |
| 22. I have difficulty in speaking some words | AM | 1 (6.7%) | 1 (6.7%) | − | 3 (20%) | 10(66.7%) | 15 | |
| 23. I can be understood in a telephone conversation | RS | 9 (60%) | 3 (20%) | − | 3 (20%) | − | 15 | |
| 24. Only my familyFamily can understand me | RF | 3 (20%) | 2 (13.3%) | 2 (13.3%) | 4 (26.7%) | 4 (26.7%) | 15 | |
| 25. Only one person in the family understands me and she always helps me to explain my speech to the others | RF | 5 (33.3%) | − | 3 (20%) | 4 (26.7%) | 3 (20%) | 15 | |
| 26. There are some people in my family that do not talk to me because they do not understand my speech | RF | 2 (13.3%) | − | 2 (13.3%) | 2 (13.3%) | 9 (60%) | 15 | |
| 27. My family has no patience with me because of my speech | RF | 9 (60%) | − | − | 3 (20%) | 3 (20%) | 15 | |
| 28. People finish the conversation with me when they do not understand what I say | RS | 4 (26.7%) | − | 4 (26.7%) | 1 (6.7%) | 6 (40%) | 15 | |
| 29. People pretend that they understood what I said | AP | 1 (6.7%) | 1 (6.7%) | 3 (20%) | 3 (30%) | 7 ( 46.7%) | 15 | |
| 30. Only my friends can understand me | RS | 9 (60%) | − | 3 (20%) | 2 (13.3%) | 1 (6.7%) | 15 | |
| 31. I need someone to explain (translate) my speech because other people do not understand me | AP | 3 (20%) | − | 3 (20%) | 1 (6.7%) | 8 (53.3%) | 15 | |
| 32. I cannot be understood by anyone | AP | 10 (66.7%) | 1 (6.7%) | 3 (20%) | − | 1 (6.7%) | 15 | |
| 33. I cannot be understood by anyone so I use the writing | EU | 6 (40%) | 3 (20%) | − | 3 (20%) | 3 (20%) | 15 | |
| 34. My speech is always understood | AP | 1 (6.7%) | 5(33.3%) | 6 (40%) | 2 (13.3%) | 1 (6.7%) | 15 | |
| 35. My speech most of the time is comprehensive, there is a need for repetition | AP | 1 (6.7%) | − | 2 (13.3%) | 7 (46.7%) | 5 (33.3%) | 15 | |
| 36. My speech is usually understandable, but does not require theface to face contact | AP | 8 (53.3%) | 1 (6.7%) | 3 (20%) | − | 3 (20%) | 15 | |
| 37. My speech is usually understandable, but it is not necessary to write some words for people to fully understand me | AM | 6 (40%) | − | 3 (20%) | 5 (33.3%) | 1 (6.7%) | 15 | |
| 38. My speech is difficult to be understood | AP | 2 (13.3%) | − | 3 (20%) | 3 (20%) | 7 (46.7%) | 15 | |
| 39. I get annoyed when people do not understand my speech | AP | 4 (26.7%) | − | 6 (40%) | 2 (13.3%) | 3 (20%) | 15 | |
| 40. My speech is never understood, I have to use written communication | AM | 9 (60%) | 1 (6.7%) | 2 (13.3%) | 1 (6.7%) | 2 (13.3%) | 15 | |
| 41. I find it difficult to produce certain types of sounds | AM | 1 (6.7%) | − | 1 (6.7%) | 3 (20%) | 10 (66.7%) | 15 | |
| 42. I can sing | AM | 10 (66.7%) | 2(13.3%) | − | 2 (13.3%) | 1 (6.7%) | 15 | |
| 43. I can change my tone of voice | AM | 9 (60%) | 3 (20%) | − | 2 (13.3%) | 1 (6.7%) | 15 | |
| 44. I am able to hold long conversations with people | AP | 4 (26.7%) | 3 (20%) | 2 (13.3%) | 1 (6.7%) | 5 (33.3%) | 15 | |
| 45. I find it difficult to maintain long conversations with people | AP | 5 (33.3%) | 1 (6.7%) | − | 4 (26.7%) | 5 (33.3%) | 15 | |
| 46. My communication got worse after surgery | AP | 2 (13.3%) | − | 1 (6.7%) | 3 (20%) | 9 (60%) | 15 | |
| 47. My communication improved after surgery | AP | 9 (60%) | 3 (20%) | − | 2 (13.3%) | 1 (6.7%) | 15 | |
| 48. After surgery I stopped expressing my ideas because of the difficulty of talking | AM | 2 (13.3%) | − | 1 (6.7%) | 3 (20%) | 9 (60%) | 15 | |
| 49. I can speak to family members on the phone | RF | 12 (80%) | − | − | 1 (6.7%) | 2 (13.3%) | 15 | |
| 50. I can talk to friends on the phone | RF | 12 (80%) | − | 1 (6.7%) | − | 2 (13.3%) | 15 | |
| 51. I can talk to strangers on the phone | RS | 12 (80%) | 1 (6.7%) | − | − | 2 (13.3%) | 15 | |
| 52. I can normally use my voice to communicate in social situations | RS | 6 (40%) | − | 2 (13.3%) | 1 (6.7%) | 6 (40%) | 15 | |
| 53. I can normally use my voice to communicate at work | RS | NA | NA | 2 (13.3%) | 1 (6.6%) | NA | 3 | |
| 54. People realize that I speak differently | AP | − | − | − | 1 (6.7%) | 14 (93.3%) | 15 | |
| 55. When I speak people look at me differently | AP | 3 (20%) | − | 2 (13.3%) | 2 (13.3%) | 8 (53.3%) | 15 | |
Functional assessment of communication in patients post-after total -laryngectomy. Adapted from Bertoncello (2004): positive and negative aspects.
| Communication Domain | Matter Relating | |
|---|---|---|
| Positive Aspect (+) | Negative Aspect (-) | |
| Family Relationship (RF) | 49, 50 | 3, 24, 25, 26, 27 |
| Social Relationship (RS) | 1, 23, 28, 51–53 | 2, 4, 5, 16, 17,18, 30, |
| Self Analysis (AP) | 34, 35, 36, 47 | 6, 7, 8, 9, 11, 12, 19, 20, 29, 31, 32, 38, 39, 44, 45, 46, 54, 55 |
| Morphofunctional aspects (AM) | 21, 41, 42, 43 | 10, 13, 14, 15, 22, 48 |
| Writing Use (UE) | 37 | 33, 40 |
Profile of research of participants research.
| Name | Gender | Age | Schooling | Active | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Male | Female | Illiterate | 1 to 4 years | 5 to 8 years | 9 to 11 years | ||||
| PAC 1 | 1 | 68 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| PAC 2 | 1 | 65 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| PAC 3 | 1 | 57 | 1 | ||||||
| PAC 4 | 1 | 61 | 1 | ||||||
| PAC 5 | 1 | 56 | 1 | ||||||
| PAC 6 | 1 | 86 | 1 | ||||||
| PAC 7 | 1 | 58 | 1 | 1 | |||||
| PAC 8 | 1 | 70 | 1 | ||||||
| PAC 9 | 1 | 63 | 1 | ||||||
| PAC 10 | 1 | 70 | 1 | ||||||
| PAC 11 | 1 | 57 | 1 | ||||||
| PAC 12 | 1 | 58 | 1 | ||||||
| PAC 13 | 1 | 47 | 1 | ||||||
| PAC 14 | 1 | 57 | 1 | ||||||
| PAC 15 | 1 | 73 | 1 | ||||||
| TOTAL (%) | 13 (86,7) | 2 (13,3) | 62,8* | 3 (20%) | 11 (73,3%) | 1 (6,7%) | 0 | 3 (20%) | 12 (80%) |
OBS: *These data refer to the mean age of participants.
Results of the answers as to Communication Domain in its positive and negative aspects.
| Communication Domain | NPV | PV | MV | BV | MTV | Total | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| + | − | + | − | + | − | + | − | + | − | ||
| Family Relationship | 24 | 22 | 3 | 3 | 1 | 10 | 1 | 16 | 4 | 24 | 105 |
| Social Relationship | 29 | 29 | 7 | 3 | 5 | 19 | 6 | 17 | 16 | 40 | 171 |
| Self Analysise | 19 | 70 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 34 | 11 | 36 | 10 | 118 | 328 |
| Morphofunctional aspect | 31 | 19 | 6 | 5 | 8 | 4 | 18 | 4 | 54 | 149 | |
| Writing use | 6 | 15 | 4 | 3 | 2 | 5 | 4 | 1 | 5 | 45 | |
| Total | 109 | 155 | 22 | 25 | 20 | 73 | 27 | 91 | 35 | 241 | 798 |
Subtitles: NPV, – not at all true; PV, – a little true; MV, – true; BV, – very true; MTV, – very much true. (+) Positive aspect, (“) Negative aspect.
General framework reflecting good and poor quality of life (QOL) from the responses obtained in 705 instances of positive and negative aspects.
| Communication Domain | Responses Thatreflect Good Qv | Responses Thatreflect Bad Poor Qv | Total occurrences | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (AN)NPV/PV | (AP)BV/MTV | (AP) NPV/PV | (AN)BV/MTV | ||
| Family Relationship | 25 (25,8%) | 5 (5,2%) | 27 (27,8%) | 40 (41,2%) | 97 (100%) |
| Social Relationship | 32 (21,7%) | 22 (15%) | 36 (24,5%) | 57 (38,8%) | 147 (100%) |
| Self Analysise | 80 (28,3%) | 21 (7,4%) | 28 (9,9%) | 154 (54,4) | 283 (100%) |
| Morphofunctional aspect | 24 (17%) | 8 (5,7%) | 37 (26,2%) | 72 (51,1%) | 141 (100%) |
| Writing use | 19 (47,5%) | 6 (15%) | 6 (15%) | 9 (22,5%) | 40 (100%) |
| Total | 180 (25,4%) | 62 (8,8%) | 134 (18,9%) | 332 (46,9%) | 708 (100%) |
| General Total | 242 (34,2%) | 466 (65,8%) | |||
Subtitles: QOL, – quality of life; AN, – negative aspect; AP, – positive aspect; NPV, – not at all true; PV, – a little true; BV, – very true; MTV, – very much true.