Maria Antonietta Annunziata1, Barbara Muzzatti2, Cristiana Flaiban2, Katiuscia Gipponi2, Carlo Carnaghi3, Paolo Tralongo4, Michele Caruso5, Raffaele Cavina6, Umberto Tirelli2. 1. Centro di Riferimento Oncologico, IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori, Via F. Gallini, 2, 33081, Aviano, PN, Italy. annunziata@cro.it. 2. Centro di Riferimento Oncologico, IRCCS Istituto Nazionale Tumori, Via F. Gallini, 2, 33081, Aviano, PN, Italy. 3. Humanitas Mater Domini, Castellanza, Italy. 4. Rete Assistenza Oncologica, Siracusa, Italy. 5. Humanitas Centro Catanese di Oncologia, Catania, Italy. 6. Humanitas Cancer Center, Rozzano, Italy.
Abstract
PURPOSE: Understanding the quality of life (QoL) of cancer survivors is relevant to both clinical practice and health care policy. The current study compared the QoL profile in this specific population with that of a normative sample for the general population, as well as with those of both healthy and oncological patients normative sub-samples. In addition, associations between the obtained QoL profile and the main socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of the sample were examined. METHODS: Three hundred and ninety-two adult long-term cancer survivors (i.e., people 5 + years from their cancer diagnosis who were free from it and its treatments) were enrolled during follow-up visits and compiled the Short Form 36 Health Survey. RESULTS: In comparison with the normative data for the adult general population, the present sample showed lower scores in Physical functioning, Role-physical limitation, and Role-emotional limitations (all differences were both statistically and clinically significant); the difference in Vitality was only statistically significant. In all eight SF-36 scales, scores of the present sample were clinically and statistically lower than those of the normative healthy subsample, whereas they were statistically and clinically higher than those of normative subsample which had experienced cancer, except for Role-physical limitation. The QoL profile was associated with gender (p = 0.002), age (p = 0.001), education (p < 0.001), occupational status (p < 0.001), and the presence of other health issues (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: These data support the utility of rehabilitative programs which integrate both healthcare and social interventions. In addition, they encourage the monitoring of the health status of this specific population, within a broad frame which simultaneously takes into consideration health and QoL.
PURPOSE: Understanding the quality of life (QoL) of cancer survivors is relevant to both clinical practice and health care policy. The current study compared the QoL profile in this specific population with that of a normative sample for the general population, as well as with those of both healthy and oncological patients normative sub-samples. In addition, associations between the obtained QoL profile and the main socio-demographic and clinical characteristics of the sample were examined. METHODS: Three hundred and ninety-two adult long-term cancer survivors (i.e., people 5 + years from their cancer diagnosis who were free from it and its treatments) were enrolled during follow-up visits and compiled the Short Form 36 Health Survey. RESULTS: In comparison with the normative data for the adult general population, the present sample showed lower scores in Physical functioning, Role-physical limitation, and Role-emotional limitations (all differences were both statistically and clinically significant); the difference in Vitality was only statistically significant. In all eight SF-36 scales, scores of the present sample were clinically and statistically lower than those of the normative healthy subsample, whereas they were statistically and clinically higher than those of normative subsample which had experienced cancer, except for Role-physical limitation. The QoL profile was associated with gender (p = 0.002), age (p = 0.001), education (p < 0.001), occupational status (p < 0.001), and the presence of other health issues (p < 0.001). CONCLUSION: These data support the utility of rehabilitative programs which integrate both healthcare and social interventions. In addition, they encourage the monitoring of the health status of this specific population, within a broad frame which simultaneously takes into consideration health and QoL.
Entities:
Keywords:
Cancer survivorship; Health status; Neoplasm; Oncology; Quality of life; Well-being
Authors: Barbara Muzzatti; Cristiana Flaiban; Antonella Surbone; Maria Antonietta Annunziata Journal: Qual Life Res Date: 2014-10-24 Impact factor: 4.147
Authors: Delphine Klein; Mariette Mercier; Edwige Abeilard; Marc Puyraveau; Arlette Danzon; Véronique Dalstein; Astrid Pozet; Anne-Valérie Guizard; Michel Henry-Amar; Michel Velten Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2011-02-22 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Cesar Ivan Aviles Gonzalez; Matthias Angermeyer; Laura Deiana; Caterina Loi; Elisabetta Murgia; Anita Holzinger; Giulia Cossu; Elena Massa; Ferdinando Romano; Mario Scartozzi; Mauro Giovanni Carta Journal: Clin Pract Epidemiol Ment Health Date: 2021-12-31
Authors: P Lally; N Miller; A Roberts; R J Beeken; D M Greenfield; H W W Potts; N Counsell; N Latimer; C Thomas; L Smith; J Gath; F Kennedy; C Martin; L Wyld; A Fisher Journal: Pilot Feasibility Stud Date: 2022-03-29
Authors: Anna Lewandowska; Grzegorz Rudzki; Tomasz Lewandowski; Michał Próchnicki; Sławomir Rudzki; Barbara Laskowska; Joanna Brudniak Journal: Int J Environ Res Public Health Date: 2020-09-23 Impact factor: 3.390