| Literature DB >> 29164136 |
Saruna Ghimire1, Praful Pradhananga1, Binaya Kumar Baral2, Naveen Shrestha1,3.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Nepal has a high prevalence of hypertension. While improving the overall health-related quality of life (HRQOL) is a central tenet to public health plans in developed nations, this focus has yet to be articulated in Nepal. Therefore, this study aims to identify the factors associated with HRQOL among hypertensive patients in Nepal.Entities:
Keywords: EuroQol visual analytic scale; EuroQol-5Dimension; Nepal; health-related quality of life; hypertension; quality of life
Year: 2017 PMID: 29164136 PMCID: PMC5681715 DOI: 10.3389/fcvm.2017.00069
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Front Cardiovasc Med ISSN: 2297-055X
Descriptive characteristics of the study participants (n = 180).
| Characteristics | EQVAS | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Mean ± SE: 63.7 ± 1.3 | |||
| Age, mean ± SD | 53.2 ± 12.6 | ||
| Gender, | 0.540a | ||
| Female | 90 (50.0) | 63.2 ± 1.9 | |
| Male | 90 (50.0) | 64.7 ± 1.7 | |
| Ethnicity, | 0.510b | ||
| Dalit | 5 (2.8) | 56.8 ± 7.3 | |
| Disadvantaged Janajatis | 48 (26.7) | 63.4 ± 2.5 | |
| Disadvantaged non-Dalit Terai caste | 8 (4.4) | 56.5 ± 6.8 | |
| Relatively advantaged Janajatis | 44 (24.4) | 63.6 ± 2.6 | |
| Upper caste groups | 75 (41.7) | 65.8 ± 1.9 | |
| Marital status, | |||
| Widow | 16 (8.9) | 53.1 ± 4.5 | |
| Married | 164 (91.1) | 65.0 ± 1.3 | |
| Educational status, | |||
| Illiterate | 22 (12.2) | 49.0 ± 3.6 | |
| Informal | 39 (21.7) | 59.8 ± 2.7 | |
| Formal | 99 (55.0) | 67.2 ± 1.6 | |
| University education | 20 (11.1) | 72.4 ± 3.1 | |
| Occupation, | 0.052b | ||
| Elementary occupations | 93 (51.7) | 61.2 ± 1.9 | |
| Clerical, service, and sales workers | 32 (17.8) | 66.8 ± 3.0 | |
| Professionals | 36 (20.0) | 69.7 ± 2.5 | |
| Agricultural workers | 19 (10.6) | 61.5 ± 3.0 | |
| Monthly family income $, mean ± SD | 296.1 ± 169.8 | ||
| Monthly family income $, | |||
| <200 | 53 (29.4) | 59.0 ± 2.4 | |
| 200–500 | 107 (59.4) | 65.4 ± 1.6 | |
| >500 | 20 (11.1) | 69.5 ± 3.2 | |
| Family size, mean ± SD | 6.1 ± 2.7 | ||
| Family type, | 0.053a | ||
| Nuclear | 100 (55.6) | 66.1 ± 1.7 | |
| Joint | 80 (44.4) | 61.2 ± 1.8 | |
| Salt compliance, | |||
| Non-compliant | 90 (50.0) | 61.1 ± 1.7 | |
| Compliant | 90 (50.0) | 66.8 ± 1.8 | |
| Antihypertensive drugs use | |||
| 0 | 27 (15.0) | 50.1 ± 3.6 | |
| 1 | 92 (51.1) | 65.7 ± 1.4 | |
| 2 or more | 61 (33.9) | 67.4 ± 2.4 | |
| Compare to past year current health status | |||
| Better | 69 (38.3) | 75.0 ± 1.7 | |
| Similar | 88 (48.9) | 59.4 ± 1.4 | |
| Worse | 23 (12.8) | 48.3 ± 3.9 | |
ANOVA, analysis of variance; EQVAS, EuroQol visual analytical scale; $, US dollar.
Mean difference between the groups by .
Statistically significant values are bolded
Factors associated with health-related quality of life of study participants.
| Univariate | Multivariate | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β | 95% CI | β | 95% CI | |||||
| Age | ||||||||
| Male | 1.97 | −3.20, 7.14 | 3.68 | −0.98, 8.33 | ||||
| Dalit | −8.96 | −24.99, 7.07 | −9.08 | −23.70, 5.55 | ||||
| Disadvantaged Janajatis | −3.16 | −9.57, 3.26 | −4.50 | −10.37, 1.36 | ||||
| Disadvantaged non-Dalit Terai caste | −9.26 | −22.17, 3.65 | −7.19 | −19.07, 4.69 | ||||
| Relatively advantaged Janajatis | −2.12 | −8.72, 4.47 | −1.52 | −7.53, 4.50 | ||||
| Married | 2.76 | −6.26, 11.78 | ||||||
| Informal | 7.88 | −1.17, 16.92 | ||||||
| Formal | ||||||||
| University education | ||||||||
| Income, $ | ||||||||
| Family size | ||||||||
| Joint | −0.84 | −5.86, 4.18 | ||||||
| Compliant | ||||||||
| Antihypertension drugs use | ||||||||
| Similar | ||||||||
| Worse | ||||||||
.
β, unstandardized regression coefficient; CI, confidence interval.Statistically significant values are bolded
Mediation analysis for the association between dietary salt compliance and health-related quality of life, mediated by antihypertensive medication use.
| Model 1 | Model 2 | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| β (SE) | BCa 95% CI | β | BCa 95% CI | |
| Total effect, | 12.97 (2.36) | 8.31, 17.64 | 11.31 (2.18) | 7.01, 15.61 |
| Direct effect, | 12.00 (2.36) | 7.34, 16.67 | 10.66 (2.19) | 6.35, 14.98 |
| Indirect effect, | 0.97 (0.77) | 0.02, 3.18 | 0.65 (0.58) | −0.03, 2.36 |
| Ratio of indirect to total effect mediated | 0.08 | 0.06 | ||
| Ratio of indirect to direct effect | 0.08 | 0.06 | ||
Model 1: unadjusted mediational model.
Model 2: adjusted for age, sex, and monthly family income.
Number of bootstrap samples for bias-corrected bootstrap confidence intervals: 5,000.
β, unstandardized coefficient; BCa, bias accelerated and corrected.